Allowed

Mrs.Latha Raghavan alias Swarna Latha and 3 others v. Mr.S.R.Srinivasan

Madras HC2 Jul 2021A/2208/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application ordering the plaintiff in a testamentary suit to commence evidence before the plaintiff in a concurrent partition suit, as establishing the validity of the will determines the share of properties.

What did the court decide?

Directed the plaintiff in the testamentary original suit to lead evidence in TOS.No.26 of 2015 first.

Mrs.Latha Raghavan alias Swarna Latha and 3 others Vs Mr.S.R.Srinivasan — Madras HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

A.No.2208 of 2021 in TOS.No.26 of 2015

¶2

A.No.2208 of 2021 in TOS.No.26 of 2015

¶3

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

¶4

This application has been filed seeking direction to the plaintiff in

¶5

TOS.No.26 of 2015 to commence the evidence.

¶6

2. It is seen from the records that CS.No.415 of 2014 has been filed

¶7

seeking partition of the estate of Ananda Sourubhi Rathinam claiming that she died intestate on 23.09.2012. The 2nd defendant in the said suit/ son of late Tmt.Ananda Sourubhi Rathinam had filed a original petition in O.P.No.673 of 2014 seeking Probate for the last Will and Testament said to have been executed by his mother on 21.09.1988. The said original petition has been converted into testamentary original suit and numbered as TOS.No.26 of 2015 on caveat being filed by the plaintiffs in the partition

¶8

suit. A joint trial has been ordered.

¶9

3. Mrs.R.T.Shyamala, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs

¶10

in the partition suit would contend that it is for the plaintiff in the testamentary original suit to prove the Will first and therefore, he should be

¶11

Page No.1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶12

A.No.2208 of 2021 in TOS.No.26 of 2015

¶13

directed to enter the box.

¶14

4. Opposing the said claim, Mr.L.Damodaran, learned counsel

¶15

appearing for the respondent in this application and the plaintiff in testamentary original suit would contend that the partition suit includes

¶16

other properties also and therefore the plaintiffs in the partition suit has to

¶17

let in evidence first.

¶18

5. I have considered the rival submissions.

¶19

6. The fact that the properties subject matter of the partition suit

¶20

were owned by late Tmt.Ananda Sourubhi Rathinam is not in dispute. The

¶21

only defence that is projected in the partition suit is the Will said to have

¶22

been executed by her which is subject matter of the TOS.No.26 of 2015.

¶23

the plaintiff in the testamentary original suit shall let in evidence first to establish the Will. If he succeeds in establishing the Will, the partition suit

¶24

Page No.2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶25

A.No.2208 of 2021 in TOS.No.26 of 2015

¶26

will have to be decided after excluding the properties covered by the Will. Therefore, it will be in the fitness of things that the plaintiff in the

¶27

testamentary original suit leads evidence first.

¶28

Hence, this application is allowed . The plaintiff in the
testamentary original suit to lead evidence in TOS.No.26 of 2015 first.
02.07.2021
dsa

¶29

Page No.3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶30

A.No.2208 of 2021 in TOS.No.26 of 2015

¶31

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

¶32

dsa

¶33

A.No.2208 of 2021
in
TOS.No.26 of 2015
02.07.2021

¶34

Page No.4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

Mrs.Latha Raghavan alias Swarna Latha and 3 others v. Mr.S.R.Srinivasan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs.Latha Raghavan alias Swarna Latha and 3 others v. Mr.S.R.Srinivasan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hitesh Jabak Vs Kishendas Chabra & Co.

Tamil Nadu Table Tennis Association Vs Table Tennis Federation of India(Ttfi)

M/S.Sun Tv Network Ltd. Vs M/S. Ushakiron Movies

The Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, Presently, The Deputy Commissioner of GST Vs The Official Liquidator

Mr. Champalal Vs B. v.Saraswathy

The Official Assignee Vs Dr.R.Ashokan