IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.A. NAKKIRAN, J.
R. Babu and Ors. – Plaintiffs
Versus
Devaki, W/o. Late Siva – Respondent
TOS No. 61 of 2016 And SA No. 302 of 2015
Decided On : 08-01-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grant of letters of administration (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. details of the contested will's execution (Para 5 , 6 , 14) |
| 3. final ruling on the dismissal of appeals. (Para 8) |
| 4. arguments against granting letters of administration. (Para 10 , 15) |
| 5. arguments on genuineness of the will (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. challenging the testatrix's state of mind (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 24) |
| 7. issues surrounding the execution of the will. (Para 28 , 29) |
| 8. dismissal of the tos and second appeal (Para 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
(A.A. NAKKIRAN, J.)
The above Testamentary Original Suit has been filed for grant of Letters of Administration to the plaintiffs as grandsons and daughter-in-law/ Legatees under the will of the deceased having effect limited to the State of Tamil Nadu and Limited to the property mentioned in Schedule 'A' of the Will.
2. The above Second Appeal has been filed against the Judgment and decree made in A.S. No.488 of 2012 on the file of the VI Additional Judge City Civil Court, Chennai dated 17.09.2014 confirming the Judgment and decree made in O.S. No.5093 of 2008 dated 13.09.2012 on the file of VII Assistant Judge City Civil Court, Chennai.
3.The plaintiffs in the TOS are the appellants and the defendant is the respondent in the Second Appeal and as both cases are interlinked and similar and the same, they are taken up jointly for final disposal. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the rank in TOS.
4.The brief facts of the case of the plaintiffs in TOS are as follows:
(i) Ranganayaki Ammal died on 24.07.1980 leaving behind her son ie. Ramu Pillai and daughter ie. Lokambal as her legal heirs. The Petitioners 1 & 2 and the 1st Respondent are the son of late Ramu Pillai and 3rd Petitioner is the wife of Late. Ramu Pillai who died on 30.06.2007. The 3rd Petitioner is the daughter in law of Testatrix Ranganayaki Ammal. Her daughter Smt. Lokambal passed away on 6.7.2000 and her husband Jayaraman Pillai also passed away on 3.8.2002. The Respondents 5 to 10 are the legal heirs of Lokambal. The Respondents 1 to 4 are the Grand Children of the Testatrix Ranganayaki Ammal through her son Ramu Pillai.
(ii) The deceased at the time of her death possessed immovable property at door No.14, Kasim Ali 2nd Street, Triplicane, Chennai 600 005, and door No.22, Ulagappa eChetty Street, Triplicane, Chennai 600 005 described in the Will as A & B Schedule properties respectively. The said property are within the Jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court.
(iii) That the writing annexed now shown to the Petitioners and marked with Letter 'A' is the last Will and Testament of Smt. Ranganayaki Ammal, and the Will was duly executed by the deceased at Triplicane, Chennai on 30.05.1979 and registered as Doc.No.27/1979 S.R.O Triplicane, Chennai 600 005 in the presence of Two Witnesses whose names appear at the foot thereof i.e. Jayaraman Pillai and Shanmugam. The deceased has not appointed any Executor under the said will dated 30.05.1979. The Testatrix has fixed her left thumb impression in all the pages of the Will. The Testatrix at the time of the execution of the Will was in a sound and disposing state of mind.
(iv)The Petitioners state that 'B' Schedule property is allotted under the Will to Smt. Lokambal and she was not coming forward to join proceedings. Therefore the Petitioners are seeking the Letters of Administration in respect of 'A' Schedule property of the Will in respect of their property only. The Petitioners hereby undertake to duly administer the 'A' Schedule Property of the Will and credits of the said Ranganayaki Ammal in any way concerning her will by paying first her debts and then the legacies therein bequeathed so far as the Assets will extend and to make a full and true inventory thereof and exhibit the same in this Court within six Months from the date of grant of letters of Administration with the Will annexed to the Petitioners and also to render this Court a true account of the said property and credit within one
The court held the burden of proof lies on the propounder of a will to dispel suspicions surrounding its execution; failure to establish genuineness results in dismissal.
The validity of a will must be proved by clear evidence, including testimony from attesting witnesses; failure to do so, alongside suspicious circumstances, results in dismissal of testamentary claim....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the fulfillment of statutory requirements for proving the authenticity of a Will, including the mental capacity of the testator and the testimony o....
Registered Will's genuineness presumed; proof under Evidence Act Sections 68/69 via signature identification by witnesses suffices when attesting witnesses unavailable; disputing party must prove sus....
(1) When a Will is allegedly shrouded in suspicion, its proof ceases to be a simple lis between plaintiff and defendant.(2) Genuineness of Will must be proved by proving intention of testator to make....
The failure to meet the statutory requirements for proving a Will under Section 68 of the Evidence Act leads to its invalidity, resulting in intestate succession applying instead.
The court upheld the validity of a registered Will, ruling that the burden of proof for allegations of forgery lies with the defendants, which they failed to meet.
The court emphasized that the validity of a registered Will must be presumed if the opposing party admits its execution, shifting the burden to challenge its validity onto the contesting heirs.
The court emphasized that a Will must be validly executed and free of suspicious circumstances, placing the burden on the propounder to dispel doubts about its authenticity.
The court established that a will must be substantiated with credible evidence, and the lack of such evidence results in the dismissal of claims based on the will, affirming equal inheritance rights ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.