1. The defendants, who suffered a decree for recovery of possession and mesne profits, are the appellants. The parties and facts are hereinafter referred to as they are available before the trial court.

2. The suit properties admittedly belonged to one Bharathy Amma. The plaintiffs claimed rights over the property on the basis of Ext.A4 dated 4.4.1997, a Will said to have been executed by late Bharathy Amma. According to the plaintiffs, Bharathy Amma let the defendants reside in two rooms in the building temporarily since they were constructing a house nearby. After the death of Bharathy Amma, even though the defendants were directed to surrender possession of the room, they did not do so. That necessitated the suit.

3. The defendants resisted the suit. According to them, deceased Bharathy Amma was bed ridden about two years before her death. She was unable to move her limbs and could not manage her daily pursuits without the help of someone. The defendants took up the task of looking after Bharathy Amma and as a token thereof, the defendants were orally given permission to reside in the house till the death of the third defendant. According to the defendants, Bharathy Am