Belew v. Jones

Citations

• 56 Miss. 342

Syllabus

<p>1. Partition. Who entitled to. Sale therefor.</p> <p>A person owning in fee-simple one part of a lot of land and the reversion in the other part, in which other part another person owns an estate per autre vie, the two parts being ascertained by metes and bounds, is not entitled, by proceeding under chap. 26 of the Code of 1871, “in relation to partition of lands,” to a sale of the lot for a division of the proceeds thereof; because such owner of the fee-simple and reversion is not the joint tenant, tenant in common, or coparcener with the life-tenant as to either part of the lot, and as to one part thereof he holds a reversion, and sect. 1809, in the chapter of the Gode referred to, limits the right of partition to “joint tenants, tenants in common, or coparceners,” and denies it to “those who hold in reversion or remainder.” The right to a sale of land for division of proceeds can only exist where there is a right to partition of the land itself.</p> <p>2. Supreme Court. Chancery practice. Effect of admissions in answer. Decree.</p> <p>A decree in favor of the complainant, in a case where the allegations of the bill are admitted by the answer of the defendant, may be reversed and the bill dismissed, upon appeal to this court, notwithstanding the defendant’s admissions, if it appears by the bill itself that the complainant was not entitled to any relief. In such case the bill is not aided by the answer, nor are the defects ’ in the case cured by the decree.</p>