Thomas P. Joseph, J.

1. Following are the substantial questions of law framed for a decision in these second appeals arising from the judgment and decree in A.S.Nos.130 of 2002 and 130(A) of 2002 of the Principal Sub Court, Kochi which arose from the judgment and decree in the suit and counter claim in O.S.No.527 of 2000 of the Principal Munsiff's Court, Kochi:

i. Whether the finding of the courts below that relationship of plaintiff and defendants 2 and 3 is fiduciary in nature is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case?

ii. Whether the legal conclusion arrived by the courts below on the basis of proved facts that Ext.B3 is vitiated by fraud and misrepresentation is correct, especially when the plaintiff, who is of full age and of sound mind executed that deed voluntarily, by which she was denuded of her property, is bound by her own act?

iii. Whether the courts below are justified in setting aside Ext.B3, when the plaintiff failed to make out a case of fraud or misrepresentation, with necessary pleadings of utmost particularity and specific facts?

iv. Whether the courts below are justified in inferring fraud from the circumstances placed, when the allege