Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
Anthony Lorudu Raj – Appellant
Versus
Amal Gracy – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision challenges trial court rejection of commissioner for aged witness (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners seek to prove will via aged attestor carer (Para 3) |
| 3. court mandates commissioner appointment for fair will proof (Para 4 , 5) |
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order dated 10.10.2025 made in IA No.7 of
2025 in OS No.199 of 2010 on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruvallur, the defendants have preferred this revision petition.
2. The revision petitioners are the defendants. Before the trial court they filed an application in IA No.7 of 2025 to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to examine one Rajammal, wife of late Mariadas. In order to prove the Will of one P.S. Inniah, who was attestor of the Will dated 01.01.1971 marked as Ex.B2 and the said attestor was taken care of by one Maridas and his wife Rajammal and now the said attestor also died and in order to prove that he was under care and custody of the said Mariadas and Rajammal and to identify his signature, they want to examine the said Rajammal through Advocate Commissioner since she is aged about 84 years but the Court below failed to give such opportunity.
Therefore, they come forward with this revi
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
