Pushpa Sathyanarayana, J.

1. S.M. Subramanian Chettiar, testator of the Will dated 11.12.1996 died on 15.12.1996 leaving behind him two sons and 7 daughters as his legal heirs. As per the last Will and Testament, the deceased bequeathed the immovable property at Thanikachalam Road, T. Nagar, Chennai, to his two sons further directing to pay Rs. 50,000/- to his daughters and appointed his own brother K. Chakrapani, ninth respondent herein, as the sole executor to carry out the terms of the Will.

2. Seeking Letters of Administration with a copy of the undisputed Will executed by the testator on 11.12.1996 at Chennai in the presence of witnesses, the two sons and two daughters of the deceased testator filed Original Petition in O.P. No. 731 of 2011. The same was opposed by one Sarala, one of the daughters of the deceased by way of application in Application No. 3515 of 2012 on the ground that it is barred by limitation and that the net value of the assets of the testator is undervalued. The said Original Petition was contested by one Vatsala, another daughter of the deceased testator by filing Application No. 3516 of 2012 stating that the petition is time-barred and sought for rejection of the plaint.

3. The petitioners opposed both the applications by filing separate counters. According to the petitioners, though the testator died on 14.12.1996, i.e., within a few days after the execution of the Will dated 11.12.1996, the Will was read out in the presence of all parties on the 11th day ceremony of the deceased. According to them, the factual aspects can be proved only after converting the Original Petition into a Testamentary Original Suit and by allowing the parties to let in their evidence and it is premature to determine the question of limitation even before the trial.

4. Having considered the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and the materials available on record, the learned single Judge of this Court by common judgment dated 31.10.2012, negativing the objections for grant of Letters of Administration, dismissed the applications holding that the O.P. Cannot be rejected even before the matter could be taken up for appropriate consideration after due notice to the respondents. Assailing the said common judgment, the appellants are before this Court with these Original Side Appeals.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records.

6. The appellants are the daughters of late S.M. Subramanian Chettiar who died on 15.12.1996. Claiming share in the father's properties, the appellants issued legal notice on 18.4.2003 demanding partition of the properties. There was no response from the respondents 1 and 2 herein and also no immediate action from the appellants. A suit in C.S. No. 524 of 2007 was filed by the appellant in O.S.A. No. 10 of 2013 on 21.3.2007. The same was contested by the defendants/respondents herein contending that the deceased father had allegedly left behind a Will dated 11.12.1996. The trial was completed an the suit was reserved for judgment on 16.11.2001. It is then the respondents 1 and 2 filed a petition for Letters of Administration in O.P. No. 731 of 2011. The main contention of the applicants is that the Will dated 11.12.1996 is not genuine one and it has been forged by the petitioners 1 and 2, viz., the sons of the deceased testator. Therefore, the said Original Petition is sought to be rejected on the ground of limitation by filing O.A. Nos. 3515 and 3516 of 2012. The said applications were dismissed by the learned single Judge by common judgment dated 31.10.2012 which is impugned in the instant appeals.

7. As the issuance of Letters of Administration was opposed, it became contentious and the Original Petition was converted into T.O.S. No. 33 of 2013.

Contentions - an overlook:--

8. The primary contention of the appellants is that the petition under Sections 232 and 278 of the Indian Succession Act cannot be kept out from the scope of Article 137 of the