Administration pendente lite requires necessity and impartiality: a neutral custodian should protect estate assets during disputed representation.

Administration pendente lite may be granted where estate assets must be collected, no person is presently entitled to receive or hold them, and a bona fide dispute over representation is pending. The Court found these conditions satisfied because the estate required collection of rent and other assets, several proceedings were ongoing, and no effective representative could give a proper discharge. It further held that the appointee should be an impartial custodian: where serious allegations are raised against the named executor and the executor is closely involved in the dispute, appointment of that executor is inappropriate. A neutral officer was therefore selected to preserve and administer the estate during litigation.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether, on the facts, the estate justified the grant of administration pendente lite; (ii) whether the executor named in the Will should be appointed as administrator pendente lite or an independent person should be chosen.

Issue (i): whether, on the facts, the estate justified the grant of administration pendente lite.

Analysis: The power to appoint an administrator pendente lite is discretionary, but the discretion must be exercised on settled principles. The governing test is necessity: where there are assets to be collected, no person legally entitled to receive or hold them, and a bona fide litigation regarding the title to representation, the Court may intervene. The Court found that the estate was substantial, that several suits and proceedings were pending, that rent and other assets required collection, and that no effective representative was in a position to give proper discharge.

Conclusion: The necessity for appointment was made out and the grant of administration pendente lite was justified.

Issue (ii): whether the executor named in the Will should be appointed as administrator pendente lite or an independent person should be chosen.

Analysis: An administrator pendente lite is intended to be an impartial custodian, akin to a receiver. Where serious allegations are made against the executor and the executor is closely involved in the dispute, appointment of that executor is inappropriate, especially when other parties do not consent. The Court also considered that the estate would be better protected and administration costs reduced by appointing a neutral person.

Conclusion: The executor was not appointed; the Administrator General of Bengal was appointed as administrator pendente lite.

Final Conclusion: The application succeeded, and temporary administration of the estate was directed through an impartial officer to preserve and collect the assets during the litigation.

Ratio Decidendi: Administration pendente lite may be granted where there are estate assets to collect, no person legally entitled to represent or receive them, and a bona fide dispute over the right to representation, and the appointee should ordinarily be an impartial person rather than a disputant executor.

---