N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

1. Defendants 1 to 6 in a suit for partition are the appellants. The plaint schedule properties originally belonged to Sreedharan Vaidhyan. Sreedharan Vaidhyan died intestate on 4-9-1986. Defendants 1 to 6 are his wife and children. At the time of the death of Sreedharan Vaidhyan his mother Parvathy was alive. Therefore, defendants 1 to 6 and Parvathy were the legal heirs of deceased Sreedharan Vaidhyan and as such Parvathy had 1/7 share in the property left behind by Sreedharan Vaidhyan. The plaintiff is one of the sons of Parvathy. He relied upon Ext. A1 gift deed alleged to have been executed in his favour by his mother Parvathy on 4-12-1986. Parvathy was aged 95 years on the date of Ext. A1. It is also the admitted fact that Parvathy was an illiterate woman. Even before execution of Ext. A1 gift deed a lawyer notice was sent to the first defendant claiming partition of the property. According to the defendants, it was actually sent by the plaintiff though Ext. A1 would show that it was sent by Smt Parvathy, Ext. A2 is that notice and postal receipt. The defendants contend that Ext. A1 is vitiated by fraud and undue influence and it is void and non