1. Both the aforesaid suits relate to the letters of administration and probate of the Will of a deceased Hindu who 2 TS.86/2000-TP.917/2000 & TS.48/2005-P.104/2005 died leaving distant heirs. The deceased in Suit No.48 of 2005 is a male Hindu. The deceased in Suit No.86 of 2000 is a female Hindu. The Plaintiff in Suit No.48 of 2005 claims to be the paternal aunt of the deceased. Her claim of relationship is not admitted. The defendant/Caveatrix in Suit No.48 of 2005 is the maternal aunt of the deceased. Her relationship is not challenged. The Plaintiff in Suit No. 48 of 2005 claims to be an heir nearer in the line of succession to the deceased than the Defendant/Caveatrix who is the maternal aunt of the deceased. She claims to fall in Item VII of Class II of the Schedule to Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act. She claims to exclude the maternal aunt who is shown to fall under Item IX of Class II of the Schedule to Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act (HSA).

2. The Defendant filed her Caveat and challenged the relationship of the Plaintiff and also the Constitutional Validity of the aforesaid items of the Hindu Succession Act as being unreasonable and discriminatory as