Allowed

V.Saravanan v. v.R.Visalakshi and 2 Others

Madras HC13 Dec 2023OP/309/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the petition for grant of Letters of Administration with the Last Will annexed to a deceased, finding the Will validly executed and attested based on evidence provided by the petitioner and an attesting witness. The petitioner was directed to execute a security bond and render annual accounts.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration with the Last Will annexed allowed in favour of the petitioner. Directed to execute security bond for Rs.25,000/- and render annual accounts.

V.Saravanan Vs v.R.Visalakshi and 2 Others — Succession and Inheritance | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

O.P.No.309 of 2023

¶2

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

¶3

O.P. No.309 of 2023

¶4

This Petition has been filed under Sections 232 and 276 of the Indian Succession Act read with Order XXV Rule 5 of the Original Side Rules, seeking to grant of Letters of Administration in respect of the Will of of one A.N.Veerappan in favour of the petitioner.

¶5

2. This petition has been filed for grant of Letters Administration in respect of the Will of one A.N.Veerappan executed on 06.10.2013. The petitioner and the second and third respondents are beneficiaries under the Will. However, the testator has given life interest to his wife, viz., the first respondent herein in respect of all the immovable properties. The testator has bequeathed the properties mentioned in the Original Petition in Sl.Nos.[i], [ii], [vii], [viii], [ix], [x] and [xi] jointly to the petitioner and the second respondent herein. The property mentioned in Sl.No.[iii] has been bequeathed exclusively to the petitioner. The properties mentioned in Sl.Nos.[iv], [v], [vi] are bequeathed exclusively to the third respondent.

¶6

1/5

¶7

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

¶8

O.P.No.309 of 2023

¶9

The testator A.N.Veerappan died on 30.10.2022. The petitioners are the

¶10

legal heirs of the testator. There is no other next kin or other person interested to be impleaded in this petition. The amount of assets which is likely to come to the hands of the petitioner does not exceed in the aggregate sum of Rs.6,10,35,098/- and the net amount of the said assets after deducting all the items, which the petitioner is by law allowed to deduct is only of the value of Rs.6,10,35,098/-. The petitioner hereby undertake to duly administer the specified property and credits of the deceased in any way concerning his Will by paying the debts first and then the legacies therein bequeathed so far as the assets will extend and to make full and true inventory thereof and exhibits the same in this Court within the six months from the date of the grant of a Letters of Administration with the Last Will annexed to the petition and also to render to this Court a true account of the said property within one year from the said date.

¶11

3 . The petitioner has been examined as P.W.1. P.W.1 in his evidence

¶12

had narrated the averments made in the petition stating that the petitioner has filed this petition for grant of Letters of Administration in favour of the

¶13

2/5

¶14

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

¶15

O.P.No.309 of 2023

¶16

petitioner in respect of the Last Will and Testament executed by the deceased A.N.Veerappan on 06.10.2013. The Will executed by the deceased A.N.Veerappan has been marked as Ex.P.2. Ex.P.1 is the computer generated death certificate of the testator A.N.Veerappan. Ex.P.1 has been filed to prove that the testator A.N.Veerappan died on 30.10.2022. Ex.P.3 is the original legal heirship certificate of A.N.Veerappan. Ex.P.3 shows that the petitioner and the respondents are the legal heirs of the testator A.N.Veerappan. Ex.P.4 is the affidavit of assets showing the net value of the assets as Rs.6,10,35,098/-. Ex.P.5 and 6 Paper publications have been effected but none objected for the same.

¶17

4 . One P.Maheshkumar, who is one of the attesting witness in the Will, was examined as P.W.2. In his evidence, he has stated that he has signed as the first attesting witness in the Will along with one V.Anand. He has further stated in his evidence that the testator was in sound state of mind while executing the Will and he has also seen the testator signing the Will and the other attesting witness signing in the document. He has also stated that the testator has seen the attesting witnesses subscribing their signature

¶18

3/5

¶19

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

¶20

O.P.No.309 of 2023

¶21

in the Will. The affidavit of the attesting witness is marked as Ex.P.7. The

¶22

evidence of attesting witness not only prove the execution but also attestation of the Will and there is no other materials to suspect the Will.

¶23

5 . In view of the above facts, I am of the view that the petitioner has

¶24

proved the execution and attestation of the Will. Hence, the petitioner is entitled for the issuance of Letters of Administration in favour of the petitioner.

¶25

6 . Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Issue Letters of

¶26

Administration in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to duly administer the properties and credits of the deceased more fully described in the schedule. The petitioner is also directed to execute a security bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) in favour of the Assistant Registrar (O.S.II), High Court, Madras. The petitioner is further directed to render true and correct accounts once in a year.

13.12.2023

vrc

4/5

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

¶31

O.P.No.309 of 2023

¶32

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

¶33

vrc

¶34

O.P. No.309 of 2023

¶35

13.12.2023

¶36

5/5

¶37

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

V.Saravanan v. v.R.Visalakshi and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Saravanan v. v.R.Visalakshi and 2 Others

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

G.Kannan Vs Radha Gopalan

Narayani Sivaprakasapillai and 2 Others Vs No Respondent

Arun Thambuswamy, Vs M/S Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

Tamilnadu Industrialinvestment Vs M/S.Super Screen Refills & Co.

B.Sekar and Another Vs No Respondent

Ar.Arunachalam and Another Vs No Respondent