S.A.No.958 of 2003

The second plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No.696 of 1993 on the file of the Second Additional District Munsif Court, Nagercoil, is the appellant in this second appeals.

2. The suit in O.S.No.696 of 1993 was filed by one Ganapathi Pillai for declaration that he is the real owner in possession of suit 'A' and 'B' schedule properties and that the Will dated 08.01.1983 is a void document and for a consequential injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the suit properties. Since the plaintiff died during pendency of the suit, the second plaintiff came on record on her plea that she is the second wife of the deceased first plaintiff. It is only the appellant namely the second plaintiff in the suit who prosecuted the suit further.

3. The case of the original plaintiff namely Ganapathi Pillai is that he is the owner of suit 'A' schedule properties, since he purchased the plaint 'A' schedule properties with his money in the name of his first wife Smt. Muthammal. Though Ganapathi Pillai admitted that the suit 'B' schedule properties belong to one Chinnammal, the mother of his first wife, it is his case that suit 'B' schedule property was gifted to him by his mother-in-law Smt. Chinnammal. He also pleaded that his father-in-law and Chinnammal were so affectionate to him and that his father-in-law had bequeathed all his assets to Ganapathi Pillai as per Will dated 13.08.1964.

4. Though Ganapathi Pillai admitted that the first defendant was brought by him and gave her in marriage to the second defendant by giving jewels, cash and other movables, the first defendant, according to him, on the ill-advice of her father-in-law, obtained a Will from his mother-in-law Smt. Chinnammal on 08.01.1983 in respect of both 'A' and 'B' schedule properties in a fraudulent manner. The Will dated 08.01.1983 was described by Ganapathi Pillai as a fraudulent one which was executed when Smt.Chinnammal was not in a sound disposing state of mind. He attacked the Will as one which was not voluntarily executed and further stated that the said Chinnammal was very weak in health and that she had no memory or power of thinking. His case was that she had practically lost her eye sight and hearing.

5. The suit was contested by the defendants. The first defendant claimed that she is the adopted daughter of the first plaintiff namely Ganapathi Pillai and that she is entitled to the plaint 'A' schedule properties, as a legal heir of her mother Smt. Muthammal. According to the first defendant, Smt. Chinnammal had bequeathed all her properties namely the suit 'B' schedule properties and also the suit 'A' schedule properties to her under a Will dated 08.01.1983.

6. After the death of Ganapathi Pillai, on 06.01.1994, the first defendant claimed that she was the only remaining legal heir entitled to the suit properties. The first defendant also specifically pleaded that the second plaintiff, namely, the appellant herein is not the legally wedded wife of the first plaintiff, namely, Ganapathi Pillai and that the second plaintiff cannot be the legal wife of the Ganapathi Pillai since her marriage with her original husband one M.Raman of Esanthimangalam is still alive. It is also the specific case of the first defendant that Late Ganapathi Pillai is estopped from questioning the validity of the Will, as he had accepted the Will dated 08.01.1983 by executing a sale deed along with the first defendant in respect of one of the items mentioned in the Will.

7. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court holding that the Will executed by Chinnammal on 08.01.1983 under Ex.B2 is valid and acted upon. The trial Court also pointed out that the marriage of the appellant with one Raman was not dissolved, even though the appellant deposed that the marriage of the appellant with her previous husband one Raman was dissolved in the manner which is recognised by custom.

8. The contention of the plaintiff as the second wife of Ganapanty Pillai was disbelieved by