SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1940 Supreme(Mad) 87

ABDUR RAHMAN
Gnanaprakasam Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Parasakthy Ammal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Abdur Rahman, J.

1. This appeal arises out of a suit instituted by two plaintiffs, one of whom is a minor, for a declaration that the will, Ex. X alleged to have been executed by one Thangavelu on 10th August 1928 was not executed by him and could not be, at all events, said to have been a valid will as the testator had not attained majority on the date on which the will was said to have been executed and that inasmuch as he (i.e. the testator) was suffering from cholera and died within a few hours of the alleged execution of the will he could not be said to have possessed a sound disposing mind. The will was presented for registration a week after Thangavelus death by one Kuppusami who was the husband of the testators sister Rajambal and was ordered to be registered on 4th October 1928 in spite of objections raised by defendant 14 - the elder brother of the present plaintiffs and by one Kandasami. The present suit was instituted on 8th August 1934. The present plaintiffs alleged that they were the nearest heirs to the estate of the late Thangavelu along with their elder brother defendant 14 and were held to be so by the trial Court. Since no objection was raised before us i




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top