Back
A. A. NAKKIRAN
Rajammal (Died) – Appellant
Versus
S. Valliammal (Died) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer:- This Appeal Suit has been filed, under Order 41 Rule 1 read with Section 96 of CPC, against the judgement and decree, dated, 31.07.1989, made in OS.No.150 of 1986, by the Subordinate Judge, Udumalpet.)
1. This Appeal Suit has been filed, by the Plaintiff, against the Judgement and Decree, dated, 31.07.1989, made in O.S.No.150 of 1986, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Udumalpet.
2. The case of the Plaintiff, as set out, in the plaint is that the 1st defendant is the wife of P.K.Sethu Ramaswamy and the defendants 2 & 3 are their children. The 1st plaintiff is the kept mistress of P.K.Sethu Ramasamy. The 1st plaintiff was living with the said P.K.Sethu Ramaswamy ever since 1948 and the 2nd plaintiff born through the 1st plaintiff on 11.09.1964. On 27.03.1977, the said P.K.Sethu Ramasamy executed a Will and the same was kept in a sealed cover in the Sub-Registrar Office, Coimbatore in Cover No.8/1977. The Testator died on 13.03.1982. As per the terms of the Will, the "A" schedule property is to be enjoyed by the 1st plaintiff during her life time without the power of alienation. After her life time, the 2nd plaintiff has to take the property absolutely. The
The onus of the propounder to prove testamentary capacity and the signature of the testator, and to explain any suspicious circumstances to the satisfaction of the court.
The duty of the propounder to dispel suspicion surrounding the execution of a Will and the requirement to remove all legitimate suspicions before accepting the Will as the last will of the testator.
A registered Will does not automatically guarantee validity; the propounder must prove its due execution and satisfy the court's conscience by removing all suspicious circumstances. Mere registration....
In a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession, the burden lies on the plaintiff to prove title on the strength of his/her own case and he/she cannot rely upon the laches or weaknesses....
The burden of proof lies with the propounder of a will to dispel any suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution, necessitating judicial satisfaction regarding the will's authenticity.
A Will has to be proved like any other document; test to be applied being usual test of satisfaction of prudent mind. Alike the principles governing the proof of other documents, in case of will too,....
A will's validity must be proven beyond suspicion, especially when claims of fraud or undue influence arise; the burden of proof lies on the party benefiting from the will under suspicious circumstan....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
