IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.3.2011

Coram:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA

S.A.No.103 of 2011

Sravamangala Satsangam Trust

rep.by its Managing Trustee,

Swami A.V.Rajagopalan

... Appellant/Plaintiff

vs.

1.R.P.Mani

2.M.Sridhar

... Respondents/Defendants

This second appeal is filed against the judgement and decree

dated 27.9.2010 passed by the Sub-Court, Tambaram, in A.S.No.110 of

2010 confirming the judgement and decree dated 23.12.2008 passed

by the District Munsif Court, Alandur, in O.S.No.487 of 1999.

For Appellant : Mr.P.B.Ramanujam

For Respondents

: Mr.K.S.V.Sethuraman for R1 and R2

JUDGMENT

This second appeal is filed by the plaintiff, inveighing the

judgement and decree dated 27.9.2010 passed by the Sub-Court,

Tambaram, in A.S.No.110 of 2010, confirming the judgement and

decree dated 23.12.2008 passed by the District Munsif Court,

Alandur, in O.S.No.487 of 1999, which was filed for declaration and

permanent injunction.

2. The parties, for the sake of convenience, are referred to

hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before

the trial Court.

3. A recapitulation and 'resume' of facts absolutely

necessary and germane for the disposal of this second appeal would

run thus:

(i) The appellant herein, as plaintiff, filed the suit seeking

the following reliefs:

"(a) to declare that the revocation of settlement

alleged to have been executed by the defendant on

4.2.1988 is null and void and not binding on the

plaintiff.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

(b) to grant permanent injunction restraining the

defendant, his relatives, men, agents, servants and

persons purporting to act on behalf of the defendant from

in any way alienating the suit property belonging to the

plaintiff."

(extracted as such)

(ii) The defendant filed the written statement resisting the

suit.

(iii) Whereupon the trial Court framed the relevant issues.

On the plaintiff's side, one P.Ramalingam was examined as P.W.1 and

Exs.A1 to A6 were marked. The defendant examined himself as D.W.1

and marked Exs.B1 to B6.

(iv) Ultimately, the trial Court dismissed the suit, as

against which, the appeal was filed for nothing but to be dismissed

by the first appellate Court, confirming the judgement and decree

of the trial Court.

4. Challenging and impugning the judgements and decrees of

the Courts below, this second appeal is focussed by the plaintiff

on various grounds and also suggesting the following substantial

questions of law:

"a) Whether the Courts below were right in holding

the Exhibit A2 was only a Will and not a Settlement Deed,

when the original documents of title were handed over to

the Settlee at the time of execution of said deed itself?

b) Whether the once the appellant had accepted the

gift settlement, the donor had any right to revoke the

same subsequently, especially when the power of

revocation was admittedly absent in the Settlement Deed?

c) Whether the Courts below erred in not placing the

burden on the defendants to establish the pleas of undue

influence and mental depression at the time of execution

of Exhibit A2 Settlement Deed?

d) Whether the Courts below were right in finding

that Exhibit A2 was only a Will and not a Settlement Deed

merely because the executor had retained life interest,

without examining whether such interest was vested or

contingent?"

5. Heard both sides.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff advanced

his arguments, the gist and kernel of them would run thus:

(i) The original settlement deed Ex.A2 was handed over by the

settlor in favour of the settlee as a measure of indicating that

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the settlement as contemplated in the settlement deed came into

effect as on the date of execution of the settlement deed itself.

(ii) Ex.A2-the Settlement deed can never be termed as a 'Will'

and it was only