(1.) The second plaintiff in a suit for declaration is the appellant in this second appeal.
(2.) The plaint schedule properties belonged to Krishnan Narayanan, the father of the plaintiffs and defendants. During 1970, Krishnan Narayanan executed Ext. A1 gift deed in favour of the first defendant in respect of the plaint A schedule property. Later in the year 1988, Krishnan Narayanan executed Ext. A2 will in favour of the second defendant in respect of plaint B schedule property. According to the plaintiffs, Exts. A1 and A2 documents have been obtained by defendants 1 and 2 from their father fraudulently without disclosing the contents of the same. The relief claimed in the suit, in the circumstances, was a decree to set aside Exts. A1 and A2 documents. The defendants contested the suit by filing separate written statements. According to them, Exts. A1 and A2 documents have been executed voluntarily by Krishnan Narayanan and the same are not vitiated on any ground whatsoever. The trial court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiffs have not established their case that Exts. A1 and A2 documents are vitiated as alleged. The second plaintiff though challenged the decision of the trial court in appeal, the appellate court confirmed the decision of the trial court. Hence, this second appeal by the second plaintiff.
(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as also the learned Senior Counsel for the first respondent.