Shanmugam v. Jagadesh
Case brief
What is this about?
Second appeal regarding title dispute based on a Will. The High Court set aside lower court decisions holding the Will inadmissible because the attesting witness failed to identify the document or signatures, and suspicious circumstances were not explained.
What did the court decide?
Judgment and decree of the Principal District Court and Sub Court are set aside. Second Appeal allowed. No costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.09.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
SA NO.843 OF 2012 AND MP NO.1 OF 2012
1.Shanmugam
2.Nagarajan ... Defendants/ Appellants/ Appellants
VS.
1.Jagadesh 2.Gunasekar ...Plaintiffs/Respondents/Respondents
PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree of the Principal District Court, Namakkal, dated 30.01.2012 made in A.S.No.77 of 2011 confirming the judgment and decree of Sub Court, Rasipuram dated 05.10.2010 made in O.S.No.337 of 2008.
For Appellants : Mr.S.Sounthar
For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Krishnan
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Will has been proved under Section 68 of the Evidence Act when it was not marked through the attesting witness and no identification was attempted while the witness was examined?
Whether the evidence of the sole attesting witness proves the Will when the document was not identified by him before the Court?
Whether the suspicious circumstances surrounding the execution of the Will have been properly dispelled by the propounder?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Shanmugam and Nagarajan
- respondent
Jagadesh and Gunasekar
Coram
M. Govindaraj
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court