GEORGE Vs. ANTHONY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KUNJANNAM ,the mother of the appellant and the respondents,passed away on 30th May 1972.( She will be referred to as the deceased hereinafter ).The deceased left behind her a few items of immovable properties.The appellant 's case is that the deceased had executed Ext.A -1 Will on 20th December 1971.It is a registered Will.The appellant filed a petition in the lower court for the grant of Letters of Administration with a copy of Ext.A -1 Will annexed thereto.The 1st respondent contested the petition and disputed the legal validity of Ext.A -1.The lower court dismissed the petition and hence the appeal.

(2.) APPELLANT and the 1st respondent are the sons and the other respondents are the daughters of the deceased.The properties described in the schedule to the petition as items Nos.2 to 6 belonged to Thomas,the husband of the deceased who died earlier.Item No.1 of the schedule belonged absolutely to the deceased.In a suit for partition filed by the 2nd respondent,the deceased was declared to be entitled to 2/10 shares in items 2 to 6.These facts are not disputed.

(3.) THE lower court held that the appellant has not succeeded in removing suspicions surrounding the execution of Ext.A -1.The learned District Judge came to the above conclusion from a variety of factors,such as,the preference town to the appellant in the bequest made in Ext.A -1,the prominent role played by the appellant in the execution and registration of that document,and the absence of adequate reasons for revoking the earlier Will,Ext.B -1.The lower court also found that the appellant failed to prove that Ext.A -1 was executed in compliance with the requirements of section 63 of the Indian Succession Act,1925(for short 'the Act ').