The appellant, the defeated plaintiff in O.S.No.22/1991

of the Munsiff's Court, Kanjirapally, and in

A.S.No.273/1995 of Addl. District Court, Kottayam, came up

with this appeal.

2. The dispute centered around execution of three

Wills Exts.A1, A2 and A4 left out by the father of

plaintiff. In Ext.A1, the plaintiff is the sole legatee

regarding the plaint schedule property. In Ext.A2 there is

some modification. In Exhibit A4 Will, an entirely

different deposition was made by the testator, hence under

challenge. The plaintiff sought declaration that Exhibit

A4 Will is invalid, and for declaring his title over the

plaint schedule property based on Exhibit A1 Will. A

permanent prohibitory injunction was also sought.

3. Both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court

rejected the contention raised by the plaintiff, but upheld

the contention of first defendant and found that Exhibit A4

Will is genuine and that it is the last testament of the

deceased.

4. There are two attesting witnesses to Exhibit A4

4

Will – one Raman Nair and one Raghavan Nair. Raman Nair is

none else, the first defendant. That Will was executed in

favour of the children of