Dismissed

Sellammal (Died) v. Govindaraj

Madras HC3 Jun 2016CMSA/17/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil miscellaneous second appeal, the Madras High Court dismissed the appeal against the confirmation of a succession certificate. The Court held that the execution of the registered Will was properly proved by an attesting witness, finding no error in the lower courts' decision despite appellants' claims of forgery and illness.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal was dismissed. No costs.

Sellammal (Died) Vs Govindaraj — Succession and Inheritance | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 03.06.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM

¶5

Civil Misc. Second Appeal No.17 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.8031 of 2016

¶6

Sellammal (died)

¶7

1.Selvanayagam
S/o.Ramasamy
2.Kaliyaperumal
S/o.Ramasamy ... Appellants
vs
1.Govindaraj
S/o.Ramasamy
2.Thaiyalnayaki
W/o.Mangan
3.Selvalakshmi
W/o.Thangarasu
4.Parameshwari
W/o.Pandiyarajan
5.Padmavathi
W/o.Marimuthu ... Respondents

¶8

Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1 & 2 r/w Section 151 read with Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree passed in C.M.A.No.3 of 2013, on 30.11.2015, by learned Principal District Judge, Perambalur, confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.P.No.2 of 2010 by learned Subordinate Judge, Perambalur, on 11.06.2013.

¶9

For Appellants : Mr.S.Udhayakumar

¶10

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

This appeal challenges the judgment of learned Principal District Judge, Perambalur, passed in C.M.A.No.3 of 2013, on 30.11.2015, confirming the judgment of learned Subordinate Judge, Perambalur, passed in O.P.No.2 of 2010 by, on 11.06.2013.

¶13

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

¶14

Appellants and the first respondent claim right under a lady by name Manickam, who was a noon meal worker. Basing his claim on a Will executed by the said Manickam on 16.04.2008, the first respondent had moved O.P.No.2 of 2010 on the file of learned Subordinate Judge, Perambalur, seeking issue of a succession certificate. It is the contention of appellants herein that such Will was a forgery and that both appellants and the first respondent, their brother, are each entitled to 1/3^rd right. O.P.No.2 of 2010 was allowed and there against, appellants preferred C.M.A.No.3 of 2013 on the file of learned Principal District Judge, Perambalur, which came to be dismissed under judgment dated 30.11.2015. Hence, this second appeal.

¶15

Learned counsel for appellants submits that as against the claim of the first respondent/PW-1 that he was in abroad when the Will was executed, it was the evidence of PW-2/attestor of the Will that PW-1 was also present at the time of registration of the instrument.

¶16

The Court below in dismissing C.M.A.No.3 of 2013 has reasoned that the execution of the Will, which was a registered instrument, stood duly proved through PW-2, an attesting witness, though RW-2, another attestor, informed lack of knowledge. The Court below further reasoned that the appellants, on the one hand termed the Will a forgery and on the other attributed ill-health to the testatrix at the time of execution, but in any event had not contended that she had not been in disposing state of mind. This Court finds no error in the judgment under challenge.

¶17

The Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶18

Sd/Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar

¶19

¶20

1.The Principal District Judge, Perambalur. 2.The Subordinate Judge, Perambalur. +1 cc to M/s.S.Udhayakumar, Advocate,sr.29544.

¶21

Mp(co) krd 8/8

¶22

Civil Misc. Second Appeal No.17 of 2016

¶23

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

Sellammal (Died) v. Govindaraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sellammal (Died) v. Govindaraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govindappa Naidu Vs Thayrammal

G.Vasantha Vs Sukumar

S.Neela Vs C.Meenakshi Sundaram

Arun @ Mohanraj Vs Preethi @ Sheeladevi

Zaibun Vs Mahaboob Bi

S. Subramanian Vs N.S. Richard