The judgment established the principles of marz-ul-maut, the requirements for a valid donation mortis causa, and the interpretation of Mohamedan Law in property partition cases.

1. The second defendant in O.S.No.1689 of 1972 on the file of the First Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, is the appellant. The deceased first respondent/plaintiff filed the above suit for partition of her half share in the suit property, for declaration that the settlement deed dated 27.11.1970 was not valid and void and not binding on the plaintiff and for rendition of accounts.

2. The case of the plaintiff is as follows:

The plaintiff is the daughter of late Abdulla Sheriff through his first wife Choti Bi alias Rahima Bi and she is the only issue of late Abdulla Sheriff and she is entitled to half share in the properties left by her father. The other half share of her father's estate devolved upon the defendants 6 to 8. The defendants 1 to 5 are the children of Mahaboob Bi alias Choti Bi, who is the sister of the second wife of Abdulla Sherif. Therefore, they are not entitled to claim any share in the properties left by Abdulla Sherif. Abdulla Sherif died on 20.6.1971 leaving behind the suit properties, the plaintiff and the defendants 6 to 8. Items 1 and 2 were purchased by Abdulla Sherif in his own name and the last item was purchased by him in the name of his second wife Khatoon Bi. Abdulla Sherif was in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the properties exercising right of ownership. The second wife Khatoon Bi of Abdulla Sherif died on 17.11.1970 without leaving any issues and after her death, the defendants 1 to 5 started exercising undue influence and control over Abdulla Sherif and prevented the plaintiff from seeing her father. Abdulla Sherif, the father of the plaintiff was not keeping good health, was very old and had high blood pressure and was also suffering from paralysis on left hand and leg and he was ailing and bed-ridden for a long time prior to his death. After the death of his second wife, Khatoon Bi, his health deteriorated. Taking advantage of the health condition of Abdulla Sherif and when he was in contemplation of death, defendants 1 to 5 fraudulently obtained a registered settlement deed dated 27.11.1970 executed by Abdulla Sherif in their favour. The settlement deed dated 27.11.1970 is not legally valid and is hit by marz-ul-maut and no possession was delivered to the defendants pursuant to the settlement deed dated 27.11.1970 and at the time of execution of the document, Abdulla Sherif was not in a sound disposing state of mind. Anticipating that defendants 1 to 5 might create documents taking the precarious health condition of the father, the plaintiff made a publication in the Tamil daily, "Dinathanthi" on 17.11.1970 stating that she was the only daughter of Abdulla Sherif and nobody could deal with the properties of Abdulla Sherif. Another publication was also made on 20.11.1970 by the plaintiff. The defendants 1 to 5 made a counter publication on 27.11.1970 giving false information. On the same date, they also obtained settlement deed in their favour. A reading of the settlement deed would also prove that it was not executed by Abdulla Sherif and the birth of the plaintiff was suppressed and it was falsely alleged that the defendants 1 to 5 looked after Abdulla Sherif, and though Abdulla Sherif executed two settlement deeds namely on 27.1.1936 and 20.5.1952 in favour of his wife Khatoon Bi, those settlement deeds were sham and nominal, were not acted upon, were not given effect to and Abdulla Sherif continued to be in possession of the property and delivery of possession was also not made. The second wife of Abdulla Sherif namely, Khatoon Bi had no brother or sister and Syed Ismail and Mahboob Bi are not brother and sister of Khatoon Bi and they are not entitled to any share. The defendants 1 to 5 are collecting rents from the schedule properties and therefore, they are liable to account for the same. Hence, the suit was filed for the relief as stated supra.

3. The defendants 1 to 5 filed a statement contending that the plaintiff was not the daughter of Abdulla Sherif and the