Short answer. Yes, but only with the court's authority. Under Rule 89, Section 4, the settlement court may authorise the executor or administrator to sell all or part of the estate even when the sale is not needed to pay debts, provided it benefits the persons interested and is not inconsistent with the will.
What the law says
the court may, upon application of the executor or administrator and on written notice to the heirs, devisees and legatees who are interested in the estate to be sold, authorize the executor or administrator to sell the whole or a part of said estate, although not necessary to pay debts, legacies, or expenses of administration
Rule 89, Section 4 — When court may authorize sale of estate as beneficial to interested persons; Disposal of proceeds. Read the full provision →
What the law says
In case of such sale, the proceeds shall be assigned to the persons entitled to the estate in the proper proportions.
Rule 89, Section 4 — When court may authorize sale of estate as beneficial to interested persons; Disposal of proceeds. Read the full provision →
Court authority is the gate
An administrator does not sell estate property on his own signature while settlement is pending. Rule 89, Section 4 allows a sale only through the court: the court may, upon application of the executor or administrator and on written notice to the heirs, devisees and legatees who are interested in the estate to be sold, authorize the executor or administrator to sell the whole or a part of said estate, although not necessary to pay debts, legacies, or expenses of administration. So the answer to whether a sale can happen is yes — but it runs through an application, notice, and a court order, not a private decision.
The sale must benefit the interested persons
The trigger for this kind of authority is benefit, not necessity. The rule applies when the sale will be beneficial to the heirs, devisees, legatees, and other interested persons — for example, where holding the property serves nobody and converting it to money would. That standard is for the court to weigh after the interested parties have received written notice, which is their opportunity to oppose. An heir who believes the sale is a bad bargain, or benefits the administrator rather than the estate, raises that in the settlement court before authority is granted.
The will can block it
There is one express limit: such authority shall not be granted if inconsistent with the provisions of a will. If the testator devised a specific parcel to a named heir, a discretionary sale of that parcel cuts against the will, and the rule withholds the court's power to authorise it. This is one reason the terms of the will matter even at the administration stage, long before distribution — they constrain what the estate's representative can be permitted to do with particular assets.
Where the money goes
A sale under this section does not shrink anyone's inheritance; it changes its form. The rule closes with the destination of the price: In case of such sale, the proceeds shall be assigned to the persons entitled to the estate in the proper proportions. The cash stands in the property's place and is divided among the same persons in the same shares. If you are an heir watching a proposed sale, the two questions worth asking are whether the required written notice reached you, and how the proceeds will be accounted for in the proportions due to each of you.