JUDGMENT Panckridge, J. - This is an originating summons taken out by the sole surviving executor of the last Will and testament of Dr. R.G. Kar, who was a well-known medical practitioner in Calcutta, and died in the year 1918, leaving a Will executed some nine months before his death. The probate of the Will was granted. The scheme of the Will was to give a life-interest in the testator's estate to his widow. 2. The widow has recently died, and the question now arises as to what is to happen to the residue of the testator's estate, having regard to the terms of the Will. 3. The Will recites that the testator is the author of certain medical books and is entitled under the publishing agreements for a share of the profits, and also recites that the testator is the owner of certain immovable properties including his ancestral house No. 107A, Shambazar Street. 4. After the death of his widow, the testator directs his trustees to establish a charitable outdoor dispensary under the name of "Durgadas Charitable Dispensary" at 107A, Shambazar Street, and he also directs that the income derived from his books and his remaining immovable properties after deducting taxes and expenses for repairs shall be spent towards the expenses of the said charitable dispensary. He also directs that the trustees of his Will shall be the trustees for the time being of the Belgachia Medical College and the Albert Victor Hospital. 5. The Belgachia Medical College has since the testator's death ceased to be known by that name and is now known as the Carmichael Medical College and Hospital, and the administration is in the hands of a body known as the Council of Medical Education Society of Bengal. 6. The parties to these summons are the members of the Council, Mohini Mohan Kar, who is the son of a brother of the testator, and one of his heirs according to Hindu law. 7. The Society have not disclaimed the trust, and Mr. B.C. Ghose appearing on their behalf has specifically stated that if the Court so directs, the Society are willing to carry out the trust on the precise terms laid down by the Will. 8. 7. The Society have not disclaimed the trust, and Mr. B.C. Ghose appearing on their behalf has specifically stated that if the Court so directs, the Society are willing to carry out the trust on the precise terms laid down by the Will. 8. Both the executor and the Society point out that the immovable properties left by the testator are in a very bad state of repair, and will require a large sum, which will have to be raised by loan, before they can be expected to bring in any income to defray the expenses of the proposed outdoor charitable dispensary. 9. It is also pointed out that the testator's medical publications have now become obsolete and no income is derived from them. It is stated it will be far more beneficial to the public if the properties are sold, and a small plot of four cottahs is purchased in the vicinity of the Carmichael Medical College and the charitable dispensary constructed and established there. 10. The Society say that after the purchase of the plot and the construction of the building required for the dispensary there will be an adequate surplus for investment with a view to conduct the charitable dispensary upon the lines that modern standards require. 11. With regard to expenses and generally as to the advantages which the proposed scheme has over the scheme directed by the Will, I consider that the Society have established their contentions. 12. To the affidavit of Nalini Mohan Kar opposing the scheme there is attached a surveyor's report which shows that, even if his figures are accepted, the charitable dispensary cannot be started for five years. Under the scheme suggested by the Society the charitable dispensary should be able to begin its activities long before" that. 13. The only point that troubles me is whether the divergence between the provisions of the Will and the proposed scheme is so great that sanction to the scheme will be in effect disregarding the wishes of the testator. 14. I have been referred to In re Weir Hospital L. R. [1910] 2 Ch. 124 where the Court of Appeal refused sanction to a scheme which commended itself to the Charity Commissioners. There the testator had directed the establishment of a cottage hospital in a house belonging to him. 14. I have been referred to In re Weir Hospital L. R. [1910] 2 Ch. 124 where the Court of Appeal refused sanction to a scheme which commended itself to the Charity Commissioners. There the testator had directed the establishment of a cottage hospital in a house belonging to him. The Charity Commissioners were of opinion that a cottage hospital was not suitable for the locality proposed, and they had suggested that the fund which the testator had intended for the establishment of a cottage hospital should be devoted partly to a nurses' home, and partly to the extension of another hospital situated a considerable distance from the house which the testator had intended to be a cottage hospital. 15. The facts of In re Weir Hospital L.R. [1910] 2 Ch. 124 are totally different from the facts here. The testator intended to establish a charitable dispensary. The scheme proposes the establishment of such a dispensary. The testator intended that the dispensary should be called "Durgadas Charitable Dispensary" in memory of his deceased father. The Society proposes to name the dispensary they seek to establish in the vicinity of the Carmichael Medical College and Hospital "Durgadas Dispensary." The testator intended to establish the dispensary at a house in Shambazar Street. The proposed dispensary is at an extension of the same street but about half a mile from the original site. It will therefore benefit the inhabitants of the same locality which would derive advantage from it, were it established in the house designated by the testator. 16. The only difference really is it would be established in a new building and not in the testator's ancestral house. 17. Having considered the question I have come to the conclusion that this is not a sufficient divergence on the testator's intention as to forbid me from sanctioning the scheme, which in my opinion has been conclusively shown to be more beneficial to the public and more conducive to the establishment of an efficient charitable dispensary than the provisions of the Will. I therefore give my approval to the scheme set out in the affidavit of the executor in support of the summons. The executor will make over the estate to the trustees of the Medical Education Society of Bengal, and until he does so he will administer the estate. I therefore give my approval to the scheme set out in the affidavit of the executor in support of the summons. The executor will make over the estate to the trustees of the Medical Education Society of Bengal, and until he does so he will administer the estate. Costs of the applicant and of the executor and trustee will come out of the estate as between attorney and client. One set of costs will be allowed for the other parties appearing. Certified for Counsel.