Allowed

Valli Arunachalam and Another v. Nil

Madras HC27 Oct 2022OP/228/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, in O.P.No.228 of 2022, examined evidence including a Will and a Codicil executed by the deceased testatrix. Upon receiving testimony from attesting witnesses confirming the testatrix's sound disposing state of mind, the court granted probate of the testamentary documents to the two petitioners identified as executors.

What did the court decide?

Grant of probate for the Will dated 17.12.2015 and the Codicil dated 10.04.2018 to the two petitioners.

Valli Arunachalam and Another Vs Nil — Succession and Inheritance | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

O.P.No.228 of 2022

¶2

O.P.No.228 of 2022

¶3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶4

The executors/ beneficiaries/ daughters of Mrs.M.V.Valli Murugappan who died on 21.01.2022 have filed the present petition, taking advantage of Section 222 and 276 of the Indian Succession Act, seeking grant of probate with respect to the Will dated 17.12.2015 and the Codicil to the said Will dated 10.04.2018, executed by Mrs.M.V.Valli Murugappan.

¶5

It is stated in the petition that the husband of Mrs.M.V.Valli Murugappan, died on 19.09.2017. In the Will, Mr.M.V.Murugappan had been appointed as executor. Consequent to his death, a Codicil was executed by the testatrix and in the Codicil, she had appointed the two petitioners herein as the executors of both the Will and the Codicil.

¶6

After completing due process, the petitioners were invited to tender evidence.

¶7

The 1st petitioner examined herself as P.W.1. The original unregistered Will dated 17.12.2015 was marked as Ex.P1 and the original unregistered Codicil dated 10.04.2018 was marked as Ex.P2. The Death Certificate of Mrs.M.V.Valli Murugappan was marked as Ex.P3 and the Death Certificate of M.V.Valli Murugappan was marked as Ex.P5. The Legal Heirship Certificate of Mrs.M.V.Valli Murugappan was marked as Ex.P4. The affidavit of Assets showing the net value of the estate was marked as Ex.P94.

¶8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

1/2

O.P.No.228 of 2022

ssi

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

The petitioner then examined as P.W.3, Mr.M.Karunakaran and as P.W.4, Mr.S.Subramaniam who were the attesting witness to Ex.P1, Will. The witnesses identified the Will and also stated that they signed the Will as attestors and specifically stated that Mrs.M.V.Valli Murugappan was in sound disposing state of mind when she executed the Will, Ex.P1.

¶14

The petitioner then examined as P.W.5, Mr.Abishek Jenasenan,

¶15

who was one of the attesting witnesses of the Codicil which was marked as Ex.P2. He also identified the said Codicil and also stated that when the Codicil was executed, Mrs.M.V.Valli Murugappan was in sound disposing state of mind.

¶16

The 2^nd petitioner was examined as P.W.2. The 2^nd petitioner who also affirmed the evidence of P.W.1/1^st petitioner.

¶17

In view of the evidence presented, probate is granted for the Will dated 17.12.2015 and the Codicil dated 10.04.2018 in favour of the two petitioners.

27.10.2022

ssi

O.P.No.228 of 2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

2/2

Valli Arunachalam and Another v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Valli Arunachalam and Another v. Nil

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

S.Rani Vs Nil

V.P.Prabu Vs K.S.Ranganathan and 2 Others

A.K.Sasikumar Vs S.Danushkodi

Ram Chandra Menon Vs No Respondent

P.Kiran Kumar Vs State by

M/s.Alliance Infrastructure Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs Meyaragan and 2 others