MEENAKSHIKUTTY Vs. NIRMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant Nos.1, 2 and 4 to 6 in a suit for partition are the appellants.

(2.) The suit property measuring 1 acre and 70 cents belonged to the parents of the plaintiffs. The parents of the plaintiffs had nine children including the plaintiffs who are two in number. The defendants are the remaining siblings of the plaintiffs. The father of the plaintiffs had another item of property measuring 2 acres and 33 cents. On 2.8.2003, the parents of the plaintiffs jointly executed Ext.A1 Will by which the suit property as also the property owned by the father of the plaintiffs as referred to above have been bequeathed to their children, after dividing the same into different plots. Subsequently, the father of the plaintiffs passed away. After the death of the father, the mother of the plaintiffs revoked Ext.A1 Will in so far as it relates to her one half share in the suit property and assigned the said share to the plaintiffs as per Ext.A2 assignment deed. The suit was filed thereafter by the plaintiffs seeking partition of their 11/18 share in the suit property on the strength of Ext.A2 assignment deed. The claim of the plaintiffs was that they are entitled to the = share of their mother in the suit property as obtained by them by virtue of Ext.A2 assignment deed and also 2/9 share of the = share of their father in the suit property in their capacity as two among the nine legal representatives of their father.

(3.) The defendants resisted the suit contending that the mother of the plaintiffs was not having a steady and disposable state of mind at the time of execution of Ext.A2 assignment deed and therefore, the plaintiffs cannot claim any right in the suit property on the strength of the said document. They also contended that though Ext.A1 is styled as a Will, it is in effect a settlement deed and as such, the mother of the plaintiffs could not have revoked the same.