The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the nature of the document (settlement deed or Will) and the validity of the cancellation deed, based on the intention of the settlor, the burden of proof in case of misrepresentation, fraud, or coercion, and the subsequent sale of the property.

1. Second Appeal No.262/2013 arises against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.152 of 2009 on the file of XVI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai reversing the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.7906 of 2006 on the file of VIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The first appellant was the plaintiff, the second appellant, who had purchased the suit property from the first appellant, was impleaded as second respondent before the lower appellant court and the respondent was the defendant in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.7906 of 2006 for permanent injunction.

2. Second Appeal No.263/2013 arises against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.153 of 2009 on the file of XVI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai reversing the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.8875 of 2006 on the file of VIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The first defendant is the first appellant and the second appellant, who had purchased the suit property from the first appellant, was impleaded as the second respondent before the lower appellant court, the first respondent was the plaintiff and the second respondent was the second defendant in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.8875 of 2006 to declare the deed of cancellation of settlement dated 22.09.2006 executed by the first defendant cancelling the earlier settlement deed dated 2.7.1971 executed by the first defendant as illegal, null and void and not binding upon the plaintiff, for consequential injunction and for mandatory injunction to direct the second defendant to cancel the entries pertaining to the deed of cancellation dated 22.09.2008.

3. The trial court disposed of both the suits by conducting simultaneous trial and by common judgment. The lower appellate court disposed of both the appeals by common judgment. Hence, both the second appeals are taken up together and decided by this common judgment.

4. The brief case of the appellants are as follows:-

(i) According to the first appellant, she purchased an extent of 8< cents by a sale deed dated 7.8.1965. On 21.09.1966, she executed a settlement deed in favour of her sister Alamelu Ammal settling 1405 sq.ft out of the said property. The first appellant has been in possession and enjoyment of the remaining extent of 2218 sq. ft. and had constructed a house measruing an extent of 900 sq.ft. in the year 1966 out of her own funds. On 2.7.1971, she had executed a Will titled as settlement deed in favour of the first respondent in respect of the property which was in her possession and occupation. In the said document, the first appellant imposed certain conditions on the first respondent. Further, she has not given any right to him to sell or mortgage or to create any encumbrance over the property during his life time and further directed the first respondent to maintain the property by paying all the necessary charges to the concerned authorities.

(ii) According to the first appellant, the first respondent never took possession of the property all these years and he did not comply with the conditions imposed upon him while executing the Will titled as settlement deed dated 2.7.1971. Though the document was titled as settlement deed, the contents found in the said document would show that it is only a Will. The first appellant borrowed loan from several persons. She is aged and has no independent income for maintaining herself and her property. The first respondent also totally deserted the first appellant. The first appellant has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the suit property by paying house tax, water and drainage charges and electricity charges assessed in her name. The first appellant is the absolute owner of the suit property. On 22.09.2006, she executed a deed of cancellation of settlement cancelling the settlement deed dated 2.7.1971.

(iii) The first appellant received a legal notice from the first respondent calling upon her to vacate the house