The court established that the burden of proving forgery lies with the defendants, who failed to demonstrate any valid evidence against the genuineness of the Will and Codicil.

JUDGMENT :

P.B. BALAJI, J.

1. The Testamentary Original Suit is filed for grant of Probate in respect of the last Will and Testament of the deceased W.S.Shanthi Devi.

2. The brief facts of the case of the plaintiff are as follows:

The plaintiff is the sole executor, appointed by W.S.Shanthi Devi, who executed her last Will and Testament on 12.12.2007 and a Codicil dated 14.05.2008. The said testatrix W.S.Shanthi Devi died on 14.05.2011. The testatrix was not blessed with any issues and her husband Mr.W.S.Venkataramanjulu also predeceased her. Under the Will dated 12.12.2007, the testatrix had appointed her brother P.G.Vivekanandam and/or her nephew P.V.SrinathYeshwanth to be the executors of the said Will. The executors have filed Original Petition for grant of Probate.

3. Pending Original Petition, the respondents 1 to 9, who are the nephews and nieces of the testatrix, were impleaded as parties and the 10^th respondent, Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust, Puttaparthi has been impleaded, being one of the beneficiaries under the Will. The petition has been filed, seeking to prove the Will and Codicil of late W.S.Shanthi Devi and Probate be issued thereof.

4. Pending the proceedings, the first executor passed away and therefore, an amendment application has been taken out to record the death of the first petitioner, who died on 05.03.2013.

5. Subsequent to the receipt of the notices, the respondents have filed caveat. Respondents 1 to 3, 5, 8 and 9 have filed caveats and the Original Petition was therefore directed to be converted into a Testamentary Original Suit. Thereafter, as defendants, the caveators have filed the written statement, contending that the Will executed by W.S.Shanthi Devi dated 12.12.2007 was true, however, the Codicil was not a genuine document and infact allege that the Codicil was a forged instrument and was not valid in the eye of law. The defendants have also submitted that the executors are not in possession of the original registered Will dated 12.12.2007, but only possessed the Codicil dated 14.05.2008 and therefore, the Codicil ought to be a fabricated document. Further, according to the defendants, the executors have not shared the existence of the Codicil with the defendants on the demise of the testatrix on 14.05.2011. The defendants have further stated that the executors have been dragging the matter for more than ten years and they have not acted in the interest of the estate. The defendants have further stated that both the attesting witnesses never signed the alleged Codicil and they refused to give necessary affidavit accepting the due execution of the Codicil. The defendants have also stated that both the witnesses to the Codicil are willing to depose before the Court about the rank forgery of the Codicil and on these grounds, the defendants pray for dismissal of the testamentary original suit.

6. On 19.10.2022, the following issues were framed:-

(i) Whether the deceased Mrs.W.S.Shanthi Devi had executed her last Will and testament on 12.12.2007 at Chennai?

(ii) Whether the deceased Mrs.W.S.Shanthi had executed Codicil on 14.05.2008?

(iii) Whether Codicil dated 14.05.2008 is a forged document?

(iv) Whether the Will and Codicil were executed by the testatrix while she was in sound and disposing state of mind without being in a suspicious circumstances?

(v) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the issuance of probate in respect of Will and Codicil?

(vi) To what other reliefs the plaintiffs are entitled for?

7. The executor P.V.Srinath Yeshwanth has been examined as P.W.1 and through him, the death certificate of W.S.Shanthi Devi has been marked as Ex.P.1; Certified copy of the Will dated 12.12.2007