atkins case PYNCENT versus PYNCENT October disapprove leath v leath Ch d a son  remainderman in tail under a settlement make by a grandfather in which the  father be tenant for life without impeachment of waste prefer a bill to have  the title deed bring into court Lord Hardwicke refuse to direct it and say  some three person and secure place agree upon by the party will be a much  proper depository than a master a bill be bring by a son against a father  where the plaintiff be only a remainderman in tail under a settlement make by  his grandfather after the death of his father tenant for life without  impeachment of waste to have the title deed bring into court that they may be  forthcoming for the benefit of all party interest a objection be take for want  of party that annuitant of the son upon the reversion after the death of his  father shall have be before the court and likewise a daughter of the defendant  who be interest under a trust term for year prior to the limitation to the  plaintiff Lord chancellor as to the relief pray it be the first I ever see of  the kind such application have be make against a jointress by a remainderman  and upon agree to confirm her jointure the court have do it Petree v Petree  atk or where the remainderman be a stranger to tenant for life it may have be  do but not where it be under a settlement make by a grandfather vide ivy v ivy  atk smith v cook atk the father be make tenant for life without impeachment of  waste and the son remainder in tail only reversion in fee to the grandfather  indeed if there be evidence that the father be destroy of deed in order to  better and enlarge his estate the court may then take care to put the deed out  of his power but the court in general be not very inclinable to direct title  deed of a family which be often very numerous to be deposit in a master hand  because they be subject to mortality the deed be very often lose and mislay to  the great detriment of family and therefore I shall think some three person  and secure place agree upon by all party will be a much proper depository upon  such occasion however as the annuitant be not before the court who have a  equitable charge upon the estate nor the daughter who have a interest in the  estate under the trust term they be concern in the title deed and therefore if  the plaintiff be right in his application in other respect I can do it till  the annuitant be first hear and the objection consequent for want of party  must be allow atkins another relief be pray that the trustee under the  grandfather settlement may execute a legal conveyance to the plaintiff  pursuant to the term of the trust Lord chancellor the trustee may very proper  say as the annuitant be not before the court if we shall convey to the son  with notice of these equitable charge we shall be guilty of a breach of trust  and liable in our own person for as there be as yet no conveyance of the legal  estate by trustee and they have notice now of the son encumbrance they can  safe do it atkins er p