The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the sound and disposing state of mind of the testator in executing a Will, as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

JUDGMENT :

P.T. ASHA, J.

PRAYER: Original Petition filed under Sections 222 and 276 of the Indian Succession Act and XXXIX of 1925 and Order XXV Rule 4 of the Original Side Rules praying to allow to prove the Will in common form and that probate thereof to have effect throughout the state of Tamil Nadu.

1. The plaintiff had originally filed O.P. No. 444 of 1995 for the grant of Probate in respect of the Will dated 15.01.1995 executed by S. Karuppiah Pillai, the father of the plaintiff/petitioner. The plaintiff/petitioner has also impleaded the other legal representatives of Late Karuppiah Pillai, namely, his 2nd wife, daughters and son through his first wife and the sons through the 2nd wife, namely, as the 1st respondent as respondents in the Original Petition.

2. The 2nd and 4th respondents had filed a Caveat and therefore, the Original Petition was converted into Testamentary Original Suit and the respondents 2 and 4 were the only defendants in the Testamentary Original Suit.

3. The 1st defendant had filed a Written Statement inter alia contending that the Will had been obtained by undue influence and duress at the hands of the plaintiff. The 1st defendant would state that considering the fact that the testator had disinherited his other children the very execution of the Will appeared unnatural. This was especially so when the father had maintained cordial terms with the 1st defendant.

4. The 2nd defendant has filed a Written Statement contending that Karuppiah Pillai along with the plaintiff and the respondents in the Original Petition and the 2nd defendant had constituted a joint Hindu family which had inherited all the properties. Karuppiah Pillai was managing these properties as Kartha of the joint family and after sale of these properties, he had utilised the amounts received from the sale for starting a business at Madras. He had started an Omni bus services from Madras to other places. From out of the business he earned considerable income from which he purchased properties in Madras and surrounding area. The properties have been purchased in the name of the 2nd wife and sons through the 2nd wife. The 2nd wife was enimically disposed towards the 2nd defendant and she has influenced the testator to prepare the Will and to purchase the properties in her name and that of her children.

5. Considering the fact that Karuppiah Pillai is only a Kartha in respect of the joint family properties he cannot bequeath the entire property in favour of the 2nd defendant. At best he owns only a 1/5th share. The defendant would submit that he had been forced to sign in a Release Deed by the testator without knowing the fact that the document that he had signed is a Release Deed. The defendant would further submit that the property given to him, namely, Rathna Photo Studio was of no value and the 2nd defendant would continue to have a right on the joint family properties. He would further submit that the Will has been executed when Karuppiah Pillai was very unwell and not in a position to do things by himself. He would therefore submit that the Will Executed by the Karuppiah Pillai is not a valid one and therefore, the Probate ought not to be granted to the plaintiff.

6. This Court had framed the following Issues:

“1. Whether the Will dated 15.01.1995 was executed by the testator in a sound and disposing state of mind?

2. Whether it is true and valid?

3. To what relief?”

7. The plaintiff had examined himself as PW-1 and one Chelladurai as PW-2. Mr.Chelladurai was the attesting witness of the will dated 15.01.1995. The 2nd defendant did not enter the box and it was only his wife who had adduced evidence as DW-1. The 1st defendant had not adduced any oral evidence.

8. Submission of the Plaintiff:

Mr. Yashod Varadhan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the counsel for the plaintiff would submit that the testator was in a sound and disposing state of mind while executing Ex.P.1 - Will though he was suffering from cancer. He would argue that t