Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. THANGARAJ
A. Ramesh, Plaintiff - Appellant
Versus
A. Manohar Prasad and Others, Defendants - Respondents
T.O.S. No. 45 of 1996 and (O. P. No. 505 of 1995)
Decided On : 06 January 1999
WILL - EXECUTION - VALIDITY - ATTESTATION - PROOF - REQUIREMENTS - INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925, SECTIONS 63, 68 - TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882, SECTION 3 - EVIDENCE ACT, 1872, SECTION 68 - INTERPRETATION - APPLICATION.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a petition for grant of Letters of Administration on the basis of a Will executed by the deceased. The defendants challenged the validity and genuineness of the Will, alleging suspicious circumstances and lack of sound and disposing state of mind of the testator at the time of execution.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Will was duly executed and attested in accordance with the requirements of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the Evidence Act, 1872. The Court found that the testator had the necessary testamentary capacity and was in a sound and disposing state of mind at the time of execution. The Court also rejected the defendants' allegations of suspicious circumstances and undue influence.
Issues: 1. Whether the Will was duly executed and attested in accordance with the requirements of law? 2. Whether the testator had the necessary testamentary capacity and was in a sound and disposing state of mind at the time of execution? 3. Whether there were any suspicious circumstances or undue influence surrounding the execution of the Will?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Will was duly executed and attested in accordance with the requirements of law, as the testator signed each page of the Will in the presence of two attesting witnesses, who in turn signed the Will in the presence of the testator and each other. 2. The Court found that the testator had the necessary testamentary capacity and was in a sound and disposing state of mind at the time of execution, based on the evidence of the attesting witnesses and the lack of evidence to the contrary. 3. The Court rejected the defendants' allegations of suspicious circumstances and undue influence, as the defendants failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims.
Final Decision: The Court decreed the suit and issued Letters of Administration in favor of the plaintiff, subject to the execution of a bond for a sum of Rs. 5,000/-.
The Order of the Court was as follows :
The petitioner/plaintiff has filed this petition/plaint for grant of Letters of Administration.
2. The main averments found in the plaint are as follows :
Varaprasada Rao alias L. V. Prasad was ordinarily residing at No. 288, T.T.K. Road, Alwarpet, Madras 18 before and at the time of death on 22-6-1994. During his lifetime Varaprasada Rao executed his last will and testament dated 27-9-1990 in the presence of Nandagopal and Kasturi Rangan at No. 8, Vijayaraghava Road, T. Nagar, Madras 17. The will was in the custody of Nandagopal one of the attesting witnesses. After his death, Nandagopal forwarded a copy of the Will to the petitioner/plaintiff. On a citation taken by the petitioner/plaintiff, Nandagopal lodged the original Will in the Court. Varaprasada Rao has bequeathed certain properties in favour of the petitioner and therefore he has filed this petition/plaint for grant of Letters of Administration on the said Will dated 27-9-1990.
3. A caveat was filed by the caveators and thereafter O.P. No. 505/1995 was converted into T.O.S. No. 45/1996.
3. The main averments found in the written statement filed by the 1st/2nd defendants are as follows :
L. V. Prasad had two sons (1) Anand Rao and (2) A. Ramesh the plaintiff herein and one daughter Gruhalakshmi the 7th defendant herein. Anand Rao pre-deceased his father and the first defendant is the son of Anand Rao. L. V. Prasad was not residing continuously at door No. 288, TTK Road, Alwarpet, Madras 18. Earlier, L.V. Prasad was staying in Bombay with his wife, who died on 17-3-1989. After the death of his wife, L. V. Prasad settled at Madras with his daughter 7th defendant herein. On 24-12-1989 L. V. Prasad had a fracture in his hip and he was admitted in Vijaya Hospital, Vadapalani and underwent two operations. Till August 1992 he was in and out of the said hospital and during that period he was unable to walk and had to be assisted by another person. In August 1992 he admitted in Apollo Hospital, Madras, and thereafter the plaintiff was looking after him. L. V. Prasad died on 22-6-1994 at the age of 86. Long earlier due to the fact of the injury and the frequent admission in the hospitals he had lost most of his senses and capacity to think independently and coherently. L. V. Prasad did not execute any Will nor could have executed any Will in a sound and disposing state of mind on 27-7-1990. The signature of L. V. Prasad in the alleged Will is not admitted as he used to sign 'L. V. Prasad' and not as 'A. Varaprasada Rao'. Due to his physical condition, he could not have proceeded to No. 8, Vijayaraghava Road, T. Nagar, Madras 17, to execute the said Will. He had special affection and trust on his daughter and the first defendant. If he had any desire of executing a Will, he would have taken the assistance of his daughter instead of Nandagopal. Nandagopal is an obliging friend of the plaintiff and the other attesting witnesses Kasturi Rangan is an employee of Nandagopal. They would certainly helped the petitioner to get up a Will as if executed by L. V. Prasad.
5. The main averments found in the written statement filed by the 7th defendant are as follows :
L. V. Prasad was continuously staying with the 7th defendant from 1989 to the end of 1992. Towards the end of December 1989 he had a hip injury and on account of that he was hospitalised and had lost the power of recognising persons and he could not talk coherently. He was not keeping good health long earlier and his conditions became much worse after his hip injury. He had treatment in Vijaya Hospital for the hip injury and in or about 1993 he was shifted to Apollo hospital and since then he lost all his senses and could not recognise any of his relations. L. V. Prasad had a desire to give the lands at Manapakkam to the 7th defendant and on many occasions he told her to maintain the gardens at Manapakkam lands where he and his wife would be cremated.
On seeing the xerox copy of the al
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
