The main legal point established in the judgment is that caveatable interest must be established before seeking revocation of probate, and the Probate Court should not decide property disputes.

1. A.No.1972 of 2011:This application has been filed by the applicants/third parties seeking to revoke the order of probate dated 22.08.2008 granted in O.P.No.720 of 2007 on the file of this Court.

2. A.No.1973 of 2011: This application has been filed by the applicants/third party seeking an order of grant of interim stay of the operation of the order dated 22.08.2008 granting probate in O.P.No.720 of 2007 pending disposal of the above application for revocation of probate.

3. Tr.A.No.2227 of 2011: This application has been filed to transfer the suit in O.S.No.13644 of 2010 pending on the file of III Fast Track Court Judge, Chennai for being tried along with O.P.No.720 of 2007 and O.P.SR.No.2904 of 2008 pending before this Court.

4. Tr.A.No.2228 of 2011: This application has been filed for transferring the suit in O.S.No.13645 of 2010 pending on the file of the III Fast Track Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai for being tried along with O.P.No.720 of 2007 and O.P.SR.No.2904 of 2008 pending before this Court.

5. Heard Mr.A.Venkatesan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr.M.Kamalanathan, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr.K.Rajasekaran, learned counsel for the respondents in all the applications.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit in his arguments that the applicants are the children of one Parthasarathy and Baby Ammal and the said Baby Ammal and one Panchalammal were sisters and the said Panchalammal's children are the respondents and one Pankajakshi. He would further submit in his arguments that the father of the applicants Parthasarathy had provided funds for the purchase of the properties in the name of the said Pankajakshi and accordingly, she purchased by lending her name and she did not pay any money towards the purchase of the said property and the said property was actually belonging to Parthasarathy, the father of the applicants and the said Pankajakshi died and therefore, the applicants have filed a suit in C.S.No.941 of 2006 on the file of this Court for the relief of declaration that the applicants are the absolute owners of the suit schedule property and for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the applicants' peaceful possession. He would also submit that the respondents had also filed a suit in C.S.No.923 of 2007 before this Court against the defendants (applicants herein) for declaration of their title regarding the same property and for mandatory injunction directing the defendants(applicants herein) to hand over vacant possession of the suit premises. Both the suits were transferred on pecuniary jurisdiction to the file of the City Civil Court and were numbered as O.S.No.13644 and 13645 of 2010 respectively and are pending before the said Court. He would also submit that the said Pankajakshi had some relationship with the father of the applicants and on that pretext only the said property was obtained in the name of Pankajakshi from Tamil Nadu Housing Board was purchased and in order to evidence the same, the said Pankajakshi had participated in the family arrangement held in between the applicants and their family members and she also executed a Will in favour of the applicants regarding the said property. He would further submit that the respondents 3 and 6 have filed a probate O.P. before this Court against the respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 in O.P.No.720 of 2007 praying for grant of probate on the foot of a Will said to have been executed by the said Pankajakshi and obtained an order of probate in the absence of the applicants. He would further submit that the pendency of the suits before the City Civil Court would go to show that the applicants are claiming right over the said property and still the respondents 1 and 3 did not implead the applicants as necessary parties, who are having caveatable interest in the said property. He would also submit that the applicants were already bequeathed with the property by the said Pankajakshi on 25.01.2