ESTATE UNDER WILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 16349, 2 October 1916, Page 5

ESTATE UNDER WILL.

COURT OBJECTS TO S

INCREASE ' IN VALIjE. I A —" f c PETITION DISMISSED. £ His Ifos'on Mr. Justice Coopr forwarded from Wellington to the Supreme 1 Court on Saturday a judgment in the matter of the Administration M, 1908, and its Amendment, re tlio cstafe of Robert Stephenson McFarland, decpsed, in- A testate, the point involved bein| a pet}- j tion for leave to sell a part' of! the real estate of the deceased. i f Mr. McFarland died in 1899. -The petitioner is his. widow, and Icttffs of $■ mihistration were granted her [in Miy, I 1899. A part of the real estate consisted J of 53 acres of land near Paroa. On . April 1, 1911, she leased ths land, to £ R. J. E. Thorp for five years at £15 a ( year. The lease contains an iptioit' to the lessee to purchase the land; for J397 ; 10s, or £7 10s per acre, upon jiving one , month's notice in writing, but iiis ojtion- ] is subject to the lessor obtaining the consent of the Supreme Court 'tojsuclypurchase. Thorp has given the require) notice to the petitioner of his ip ten tun to ] exercise the option, and the pet iioner applied to the Court for consent. j The Guardian Objects. ] » ' ,• • I The . deceased left six children,[Jail of whom wero under 21 years of ago'at the time the lease was granted. Thee cf those children are how over 21, am these and the guardian ad litem of th^ minor* oppose the petition, the present fflluo of the land being at least £16 per aife. i "It is settled law," His Honca stated, "that an administrator ( cannot irant an (option to purchase during the Currency of the lease at a price fixed at t$ date of the grant of the property, leasee# By doing so he prevents himself fro? exercising any judgment upon the question j whether the property over jhich the option is granted is worth the date when the option is excised. In the present case it is clear thjt the un- | improved value of the land ledfed is now practically twice as much astjit was in 1 1011. Section 7 of the Administration , ict cannot,, therefore, be nvoked, as iaimcd in aid of the exercise J an option ' ti. purchase at a price fixed five years . a jo, where it is clear that Mm present ■ value of the property is gveajy in excess of|he price fixed by the opwn. j| Court Refuses Oonxl. ( Court Refuses Com#)t. "lyhat the Court has & determine ! "What the Court has determine ' undir Section 7 is whether? the price at" ' ■whim, it is proposed to sol the land is, at tfe time t.he application for the con- ' sent the Court is madl a fair price ' for tie properly. Thercfije, in the pre- ; sent case the consent of tfe Court to the 1 proposed sale at £7 10s nr acre must be 1 refused", _ I, .. His Honor dismissed tie petition, adding that if the lessee lftd any personal " rcmedyVagainst the ((/ministration to could . ottain it on this petition. ■. | ... . J -