1. The petition originally filed for the grant of Letters of Administration has been converted as suit in view of the caveat filed by the defendants herein.

2. He brief facts of the case of the plaintiffs are as follows:-

(i) The 1st and 2nd plaintiffs are the daughters and 3rd and 4th plaintiffs are the sons of one Chandra Ammal @ Chandra Bai, who is the 1st daughter of the deceased K.R. Lokiah Naidu. 1st respondent is the brother of the said Chandra Ammal @ Chandra Bai and one Mrs. Govindammal and son of the said deceased K.R. Lokiah Naidu. The 2nd respondent is the son, 3rd respondent is the daughter respectively of one Mrs. Govindammal, who is the youngest daughter of the said deceased K.R. Lokiah Naidu. The deceased Lokiah Naidu died on 01.3.1964, leaving two properties, viz. (1) The House and Land at premises no. 3, Alagiri Nagar, II Street, Vadapalani, Madras 26 and (2) the house with leasehold rights of land at premises no. 8, Egavalliamman Koil Street, George Town, Madras 600 001.

(ii) The said K.B. Lokiah Naidu, left a registered Will dated 14.02.1963. As per the Will, the said Chandra Ammal @ Chandra Bai has life interest over the first property stated above and after her death, her issues namely, the plaintiffs herein are the beneficiaries of the said Will relating to the said property. Similarly, the said Govindammal and the 1st respondent herein have life interest over the above said second property and after their life time, their respective issues are the joint beneficiaries of the said Will relating to the above said second property.

(iii) While so, 1st respondent has suppressed the said Will and filed a partition suit being O.S. No. 8024 of 1992, on the file of the III Assistant City Civil Court, Madras. After receipt of summons, when the plaintiffs searched the old trunk box, they came to know about the Will. Hence, they filed the present suit for Letters of Administration.

(iv) The plaintiffs also undertakes to duly administer the property no. 1 and credits of the deceased in any way concerned in the Will by paying first her debts and then the legacies therein bequeathed so far as the assets will extend and to make a full and true inventory thereof and exhibits the same to the Court within six months from the date of grant of Letters of Administration with the Will annexed to the plaintiffs and also to tender to this court a true account of the said property and credits within one year from the said date.

3. The brief facts of the case of the 1st defendant are as follows:-

The allegations that the Will was executed by the deceased Lokiah Naidu is denied. The will was the outcome of the undue influence and coercion played upon the deceased Lakiah Naidu. The property mentioned in the Will is an entirely different property. The Will must have been brought into existence by not exercising any free Will on the part of the Testator. The 1st defendant submit that the deceased Lokiah Naidu did not execute any Will nor execute any testamentary disposition of any of his properties. Therefore, the plaintiffs cannot claim any exclusive rights over the said property. The Will by reason of its registration cannot claim to be a true and genuine. In fact, in the alleged Will, Chandra Ammal @ Chandra Bai, appears to have attested the Will. But the plaintiffs states that the said Chandra Ammal @ Chandra Bai was a legatee and had been made to become entitled to the legacy created in the said Will, which is not enforceable in law. Therefore, the suit is not maintainable in law. Hence, the 1st defendant prayed for dismissal of the suit.

3.1 The brief facts of the case of the 2nd defendant are as follows:-

(i) The 2nd defendant denied all the allegations and averments made in the petition. According to the 2nd defendant, he is the