The burden of proof lies on the proponent of a Will to establish its validity, including proper execution and attestation as required by law.

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 gold jewels of their mother was utilized for purchase of the property. Their father was working in Indian Tobacco Company since 1970. He raised money from his savings and contributed amount to the construction of house in the land. It is also denied that his father had physical and mental ailments. According to them, the plaintiffs are aware of the settlement deed executed in the year 2006 and the same has been questioned after a lapse of more than five years. The father of the defendants has executed a Will and a settlement deed in respect of item Nos.1 and 2 of the suit properties. Hence, contended that the suit is barred by limitation.

5. In the additional written statement filed by the first defendant, it is his contention that as his father has already executed a Will and the properties have already been dealt with, no property in item No.2 is available for partition. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the suit.

6. The defendants 2 to 4 have been set exparte in the suit.

7. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues have been framed for consideration in the suit :

1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of partition of suit schedule properties?

2. Whether the plaintiffs can get the relief of declaration in respect of registered settlement deed dated 02.06.2006 as null and void against the defendants?

3. Is it correct to say that plaintiffs can get 1/6^th share each in item 3, 4 suit property alone?

4. Whether the suit is barred by limitation?

5. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief of permanent injunction in respect of suit properties against defendants 1, 5 to 7?

6. Whether the Settlement dated 02.06.2006 was obtained by first defendant from his father under suspicious circumstances?

7. To what relief?

Additional Issue No.1

Whether the registered Will dated 02.06.2006 said to have been executed by the plaintiff's father and the first defendant in favour of the second defendant is null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs?

8. On the side of the plaintiffs P.W.1 to P.W.4 have been examined and and Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.22 have been marked. On the side of the defendants, D.W.1 to D.W.3 have been examined and Ex.B.1 to Ex.B.3 have been marked. The trial Court relying upon the original Will and the settlement deed which are marked as Ex.B.2 and B.3, dismissed the suit in respect of Item Nos.1 and 2 of the suit schedule properties. Challenging the same, the present appeal has been filed.

9. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants admitting that the properties have been purchased by their father, it is his contention that the Will and settlement deed in respect of item Nos.1 and 2 of the suit schedule properties, the trial Court accepted that both the Settlement Deed Ex.B.2 and Will Ex.B.3 without any proof. The very execut