Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
YADHU MOHAN – Appellant
Versus
RAJESH KUMAR P.R. – Respondent
Tr.Appeal(C) 7/2021
Headnote on the Validity of Unregistered Will:
The validity of an unregistered Will primarily depends on its execution within the jurisdiction of the testator and the presence of witnesses, as the law generally considers such a Will valid if it is executed in accordance with the legal requirements, including the voluntary act of the testator and the attestation by witnesses who are residents of the same jurisdiction (!) (!) . The court's role includes examining the circumstances surrounding the Will's execution, the credibility of witnesses, and whether the Will was created free of undue influence, coercion, or fraud (!) . While registration is not a mandatory requirement for the validity of a Will, the absence of registration may raise questions regarding its genuineness and the circumstances of its execution, often necessitating a detailed inquiry into its authenticity (!) . The court may also consider criminal proceedings or other related disputes, such as allegations of forgery, to determine the Will's validity, ensuring that the decision is made in the interest of justice and fairness (!) .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN &
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 16TH BHADRA, 1943 TR.APPEAL(C) NO. 7 OF 2021 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT IN Tr.P(C)NO.183/2021 DATED 13.07.2021 APPELLANT:
YADHU MOHAN AGED 19 YEARS, S/O V.V. MOHANAN, AMRITHA, KULAKKATU P.O., MUTHEDATH MADAMBU AMSOM, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD - 679 503 BY ADVS.
P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER RESPONDENTS:
1 RAJESH KUMAR P.R.
AGED 40 YEARS, S/O RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, MANNAYAMKOT HOUSE, KATTACHIRA, BHARANIKKAVU, ALAPPUZHA - 690 503 2 GOUTHAM MOHAN AGED 21, S/O V.V. MOHANAN, AMRITHA, KULAKKATU P.O., MUTHEDATHU MADAMBY AMSOM, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD - 679 503 BY ADV R.LEELA ADV.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY - R2 THIS TRANSFER APPEAL(CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.07.2021, THE COURT ON 07.09.2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
“C.R”
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The appellant is the petitioner in Tr.P.(C)No.183 of 2020, a transfer petition filed before this Court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking an order to transfer O.S.No.57 of 2020 pending before the Munsiff Court, Kayamkulam to the Sub Court, Ottapalam, for being jointly tried along with O.S.No.20 of 2020 pending before that Court. By the order dated 13.07.2021, the learned Single Judge dismissed Tr.P.(C)No.183 of 2020. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has filed this Tr.Appeal, under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent and also the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
3. The 1st respondent herein filed O.S.No.57 of 2020 before the Munsiff Court, Kayamkulam, on 11.02.2020, against the appellant herein and his brother, the 2nd respondent herein, seeking permanent prohibitory injunction restraining them from trespassing into the plaint schedule property. The 1st respondent filed the said suit, claiming to be a ‘live-in partner’ of M.S. Chitra, the deceased mother of the appellant and the 2nd respondent, and sought for permanent prohibitory injunction based on his alleged possession, ownership and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property, on the strength of an unregistered Will dated 06.10.2019, alleged to have been executed by M.S. Chitra. The reliefs sought for in O.S.No.57 of
2020 read thus;
“(a) വ(cid:2)ദ(cid:4)യ(cid:6)ട(cid:8) ക(cid:11)വശത(cid:4)ല(cid:6)(cid:15) ഉ(cid:8)മസതയ(cid:4)ല(cid:6)(cid:15) അന(cid:6)ഭവത(cid:4)ല(cid:6)(cid:15) ത(cid:2)മസത(cid:4)ല(cid:6)(cid:15) ഇര(cid:6)ന(cid:6)വര(cid:6)ന അന(cid:27)(cid:2)യപട(cid:4)(cid:11)യ(cid:4)ൽ അനധ(cid:4)(cid:11) തമ(cid:2)യ(cid:4) പപവവശ(cid:4)ക(cid:6)(cid:11)വയ(cid:2), ന(cid:2)ശവമ(cid:2)ശ(cid:11)ൾ വര(cid:6)ത(cid:6)(cid:11)വയ(cid:2), വ(cid:2)ദ(cid:4)യ(cid:6)ട(cid:8) ത(cid:2)മസത(cid:4)ന(cid:6)(cid:15) അന(cid:6)ഭവത(cid:4)ന(cid:6)(cid:15), ക(cid:11)വശത(cid:4)ന(cid:6)(cid:15) ത(cid:8)സ(cid:15) വര(cid:6)ത(cid:6)(cid:11)വയ(cid:2) ട&യ(cid:6)നത(cid:4)ൽന(cid:4)ന(cid:6)(cid:15) പപത(cid:4)(cid:11)ട’യ(cid:6)(cid:15) ആൾ വപടരയ(cid:6)(cid:15) ശ(cid:2)ശ)തമ(cid:2)യ(cid:4)
ന(cid:4)വര(cid:2)ധ(cid:4)ച+(cid:15).
(b) ഈ നമർ വ(cid:27)വഹ(cid:2)രത(cid:4)നട1 സ(cid:11)ലവ(cid:4)ധ ട&ലവ(cid:6)(cid:11)’+(cid:15) തർക(cid:4)ക(cid:6)ന പപത(cid:4)(cid:11)’(cid:4)ല(cid:6)(cid:15) സ)ത(cid:6)(cid:11)’(cid:4)ൽ സ(cid:2)പ(cid:4)ച ഈ(cid:8)(cid:2)ക(cid:4)ടയ(cid:8)(cid:6)ക(cid:6)നത(cid:4)വലയ3 വ(cid:2)ദ(cid:4)ടയ അന(cid:6)വദ(cid:4)ച+(cid:15).
(c) വ(cid:27)വഹ(cid:2)ര മവ4(cid:27) അന(cid:6)വദ(cid:4)ക(cid:2)വ(cid:6)ന യ(cid:6)കവ(cid:6)(cid:15) ഉ&(cid:4)തവ(cid:6)മ(cid:2)യ ഇതര പര(cid:4)ഹ(cid:2)രങൾ(cid:11)7(cid:8)(cid:4) അന(cid:6)വദ(cid:4)ച+(cid:15) അന(cid:27)(cid:2)യ(cid:15) വ(cid:4)ധ(cid:4)
ഉണ(cid:2)(cid:11)(cid:6)മ(cid:2)1(cid:2)(cid:11)ണടമന(cid:6) അവപക(cid:4)ച+ട(cid:11)(cid:2)ള+ന(cid:6).”
4. The 2nd respondent herein filed O.S.No.20 of 2020 before the Sub Court, Ottapalam, on 21.02.2020, against the appellant, his father V.Mohanan and the 1st respondent
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
