LAWS(MAD)-1992-4-41

S P THIRUNAVUKKARASU Vs. S P LOGANATHAN

Decided On April 29, 1992
S.P.THIRUNAVUKKARASU Appellant
V/S
S.P.LOGANATHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A learned single Judge of this Court has ordered for grant of probate of a will. One S. P. Shanmugha Mudaliar was a businessman in Madras. He executed a registered will on 26-5-1971 in the presence of witnesses making certain dispositions of his properties. On 2-12-1973 he executed a codicil under which he appointed the plaintiffs as the executors of the will. The plaintiffs/respondents then applied for probate. The eldest son of Shanmugha, however, disputed the will. According to him, his father who was aged about 70 years at the relevant time, was suffering from cataract, kidney and heart trouble. The 1st plaintiff was looking after the business of the father who was solely dependent on him. The first plaintiff thus was in a position to dominate his father and was exercising undue influence and coercion. The will and the codicil, according to him, were executed by Shanmugha only under undue influence and coercion and not out of his own free will or consent or in a sound disposing state of mind. He also maintained that the will was unnatural and artificial as the eldest son has been practically disinherited.

(2.) In the course of trial it, however, transpired that Shanmugha had two wives. When he executed the will under Ex. P. 2, Shanmugha possessed considerable wealth and properties. Besides, one of the two wives (2nd wife) was alive at that time and he had three sons and seven daughters. The will, Ex. P. 2, was attested by three witnesses besides the scribe. The facts which are not in dispute and are noticed by the learned single Judge in this behalf are that the first attestor was none else than a leading lawyer of this Court, the other was his clerk who had written and attested the will. Besides, however, Mr. Ramamurthy Iyer, learned Advocate and Rama Rao, his clerk, there were two other persons, P.Ws. 2 and 3 who had attested the will.

(3.) The plaintiffs examined two attesting witnesses, P.Ws. 2 and 3 as the other two, namely, the learned Advocate and his clerk were dead. P.W. 2 Ramachandra Chettiar is a businessman having been assessed to income-tax, wealth-tax and corporation tax. He claimed to know the testator for about 35 years. His evidence has been considered by the learned single Judge in these words :