The High Court of Madras allowed a petition for grant of probate of a Will executed by Unnam Kondaiah in favor of his son and grandson. The court found the Will valid and directed the petitioner to inventory assets.
Grant of probate of the Will dated 23.05.1996 for the property owned by the deceased.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION)
FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2021
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN
O.P.No. 510 of 2020 In the matter of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (Act XXXIX of 1925) and In the matter of Last – Will and Testament of Unnamkondaiah - Deceased Mr.V.VENKATESWARALU S/o.Late Unnam Kondaiah, No.7/4, Narasimma Nagar, 3rd Street, Pulianthope, Chennai-600 012 ..Petitioner -Vs1. Mr.V.SAPTHAGIRI S/o.V.Venkateswaralu, No.7/4, Narasimma Nagar, 3rd Street, Pulianthope, Chennai-600 012 2.Mrs.D.KONDAMMA D/o.Late Unnam Kondaiah, No.24, Lakshmiamman Nagar, 1st Street, Selavoyal, Chennai-600 051 ..Respondents Original Petition praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the petitioner to prove the WILL in common form and that probate thereof
to having effect Limited to the state of Tamil Nadu may be granted to him.
2
This Original Petition coming on this day before this court for hearing
the court made the following order:
The Original Petition has been laid for the grant of probate under Sections 222 and 276 of Indian Succession Act, 1925, r/w Order XXV Rule 4 of the Original Side Rules.
first respondent is the son of the petitioner and the second respondent is the daughter of the deceased Unnam Kondaiah. It is put forth by the petitioner that the deceased Unnam Kondaiah purchased the property with lease hold rights situated at No.7/4, Plot No.160, Narasimma Nagar, 3rd Street, Peambur Baracks, Pulianthope, Chennai 600 012, measuring an extent of 1988 sq. ft. by way of the registered sale deed dated 06.12.1982. It is further stated that the deceased Unnam Kondaiah had executed a registered
Will dated 23.05.1996 in the presence of the witnesses in a full and fit state of mind and health and on his own volition bequeathing the abovesaid
property in favour of the petitioner and the first respondent, granting life interest in favour of the petitioner and absolute right in favour of the first respondent. The petitioner had been appointed as the executor in the Will
by the deceased and therefore, according to the petitioner, he has life time
interest over the property bequeathed and after his demise, the first https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondent shall take the property bequeathed absolutely with all rights as
3
set out in the Will. It is further stated that Unnam Kondaiah died on 26.10.1998 and that his wife Mrs. Narasimma predeceased him on 28.12.1996 and as well as the parents of the deceased Unnam Kondaiah predeceased him. It is further put forth that as per the terms of the Will, the petitioner is in the possession and enjoyment of the property. Thus,it is the case of the petitioner that he and the first respondent are named as legatees in the abovesaid Will executed by the testator and the amount of asset which are likely to come in the hands of petitioner and the first respondent is of the value of Rs.39,80,000/-. It is further stated that no application has been preferred in any court for the probate of the Will left by the deceased. The petitioner undertakes to administer the property and credits of the deceased testator by paying first his debts and then the legacies so far as the assets will extend and to make a full and true inventory thereof and exhibit the
same in the Court within six months from the grant of probate as well as render a true account of the said property and credits within on year from the grant of probate. As the petitioner was not fully aware of the necessity of obtaining the probate of the Will, it is put forth that the delay had occurred in filing the petition for probate. Thus according to the petition, he has come forward with the petition for the grant of probate qua the Will
dated 23.05.1996 left by the deceased Unnam Kondaiah.
4
matter was referred to the Master for recording the evidence. In support of
the petitioner's case, the petitioner has examined himself as P.W.1 and
marked Exs.P1 to P12, detailed as under.
deceased testator UnnamKondaiah.
02.08.2000 in respect of the deceased Unnam Kondaiah (marked after comparing and verifying with the original)
the petitioner and the first respondent.
deceased Unnam Kondaiah (marked after comparing and
verifying with the original).
5
Certificate dated 04.09.2020.
10)Ex.P12 is the affidavit of assets showing the net value of the
estate as Rs.39,80,000/-
Mallikarjuna @ Mallaiah as P.W.2 and P.W.2, in his evidence has deposed that the deceased Unnam Kondaiah had executed the said Will in his presence and in the presence of the other witness C.G. Kasiah and he and the other attestor has witnessed the testator executing the Will and signing in all the pages of the Will and that they had attested in the presence of the testator and that the testator was in a sound and disposing state of mind, memory and understanding at the time of the execution of Ex.P1 Will. Ex.P13 is the affidavit of P.W.2.
granting life interest in favour of the petitioner and absolute right in favour
of the first respondent qua the property bequeathed. It is further noted that
6
the deceased testator was in the fit state of mind and had executed the Will
in favour of the petitioner and the first respondent on his own volition and in the fit state of mind and health and thus it is seen that the petitioner had been appointed as the executor in the Will left by the testator. From the evidence of P.W.2, the attestor, the same being wholly reliable, it is found that the petitioner has established the truth and validity of Ex.P1 Will in accordance with law.
has made out the case for the grant of probate in his favour as prayed for in the Original Petition. Resultantly, the petitioner is entitled for the grant of probate qua the Will dated 23.05.1996 as prayed for. The petitioner is directed to make a full and true inventory of the assets as well as the full
and true account of the said property and credits within the time as undertaken by him in the petition. Accordingly, the Original Petition stands allowed.
//Certified to be a true copy// Dated this the day of 2021
SU-28.04.2021 COURT OFFICER(O.S.)
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of probate of the Will of the deceased Unnam Kondaiah.
Whether the Will executed by the deceased on 23.05.1996 is valid and has been executed in a fit state of mind.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
V. Venkateswaralu
V. Sathagiri
D. Kondamma
T. Ravindran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
