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

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

The plaintiffs are the sons of one Krishnamurthy, who is the brother of V.M.Balasubramanian, the testator herein. The said V.M.Balasubramanian left a Will dated 10.02.2009 bequeathing the movable properties, namely, gold jewels, silver articles and brass articles are to be acquired by the plaintiffs absolutely. The savings amount of Rs.8,000/- in the Indian Overseas Bank in Account No.21200 is to be divided equally among the plaintiffs. The second plaintiff was given with life interest in the immovable property bearing No.19, Balambika Nagar, Villivakkam, Chennai-49 and the absolute title vested with the first plaintiff. The first plaintiff was directed to take care of the second plaintiff from and out of the income derived in the property, since he is a divorcee. The wife of the testator, namely, Rajalakshmi, pre-deceased the testator on 17.01.2009. The settlement deed for the property executed in favour of the defendant was cancelled by the testator on 10.02.2009 and the same was duly intimated to the defendant by the deceased Balasubramanian. To avoid further litigation, the deceased had executed and registered his last Will and Testament dated 10.02.2009. Hence, the suit is filed for grant of Letters of Administration for administering the property covered under the Will of the deceased V.M. Balasubramanian.

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

(i) Denying the allegations contained in the plaint, the defendant stated that the the above petition for grant of Letters of Administration of the alleged Will dated 10.02.2009 said to have been executed by the deceased V.M.Balasubramanian, is per se not maintainable in so far as it relates to the Item II of the schedule mentioned immovable property as the testator has no semblance of right over the immovable property. According to the defendant, the testator, out of love and affection and as per his wish and desire, settled the house property absolutely in favour of the defendant. The settlement deed is irrevocable. Later the testator also registered a Deed of Cancellation of Will registered as Document No.73/2007 dated 16.11.2008. According to the defendant, the alleged Deed of Cancellation of Settlement is void, invalid and legally unenforceable.

(ii) It is stated by the defendant that by virtue of the above said Settlement Deed, the testator transferred his right, title and interest over the said house property in favour of her absolutely and she had also accepted and acted upon the settlement. Thereafter, the defendant got the mutation of Revenue entries and also paid property tax and other taxes. According to the defendant, due to the old age, the testator fell seriously ill, physically and mentally unstable and bedridden and looked after by his wife and assisted by the defendant as the plaintiffs have totally neglected them. While so, suddenly, on 17.01.2009, the testator's wife died leaving the testator alone in the house property. Thereafter, the plaintiffs threatened her with serious consequences and not even permitted her to enter the house. The defendant further states that the plaintiffs, who had custody of the testator in his last day and dominating the Will of the testator have fraudulently brought out the alleged Will by exercising undue influence on the testator as he is not in a position to repudiate. Hence, the defendant prayed for dismissal of the suit.

4. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues are framed: -

(1) Whether the alleged Will dated 10.02.2009 is true and valid as pleaded by the plaintiffs?

(2) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to letters of administration as alleged in the plaint