Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J
K.Ebrahim – Appellant
Versus
K.Prabudoss – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N. Sathish Kumar, J.
Challenging the dismissal of the suit in respect of Item Nos.1 and 2 of the suit properties, the present appeal has been filed.
2. The parties are arrayed as per their own ranking before the trial Court.
3. The plaintiffs and the defendants are sons and daughters of one V.Kottaiah and K.Asirvathamal. According to the plaintiffs, the property has been purchased by their father on 04.05.1983 by utilizing 30 sovereigns of gold jewels of their mother. According to the plaintiffs, the first defendant has two wives and he has exploited the rents derived from the suit properties. Further, their father was suffering from physical and mental infirmities for many years. Hence, after his death, when the plaintiffs demanded partition, the defendants have not come forward for the same. Hence, the suit for partition and declaration that the Will and settlement deeds as null and void and cancellation of the above documents.
4. The first defendant filed the written statement, which is adopted by the defendants 5, 6 and 7. In the written statement, the first defendant admitting that the property has been purchased by their father Kottaiah, denied that 30 sovereigns of gol
The burden of proof lies on the proponent of a Will to establish its validity, including proper execution and attestation as required by law.
Settlement deeds must be credible; conflicting evidence regarding execution can lead to their invalidation, impacting property partition.
The validity and binding nature of the settlement deed, the requirement of proof of execution under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, and the applicability of the Hindu Succession Act were centr....
If members of a family who are joint in status and carry on business and acquire property by their joint labour and exertions without aid of any ancestral nucleus presumption is that property so acqu....
The court emphasized the necessity of attesting witnesses for will validity and clarified suppression of facts must show intent to deceive to affect the decree's integrity.
The plaintiff bears the burden of proof in asserting property as joint family assets, and failure to demonstrate the existence of a joint family or common funding negates claims to partition.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of property rights based on the source of purchase and the validity of settlement deeds executed within a family.
Presumption under Section 90 of Evidence Act is applicable to Wills – Registration, by itself, in all cases, is not a proof of execution.
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
