(1.) The suit has been filed for partition and separate possession of the properties belonging to the deceased Venkataraja Konar, based on a will purportedly executed by him on 6/9/1998 in favour of the plaintiffs. Venkataraja Konar died on 2/10/1998. The plaintiffs are sister and brother.
(2.) According to the plaintiffs, the first plaintiff married Venkataraja Konar on 22/8/1991 as per the customs of their caste, in the presence of relatives, at the Rice Mill premises owned by Venkataraja Konar. The said rice mill premises was the matrimonial home of the deceased and the first plaintiff. The second plaintiff, being the brother of the first plaintiff, was residing with his sister and was taking care of Venkataraja Konar during his last days. It is the case of the plaintiffs that out of love and affection, Venkataraja Konar bequeathed his properties to his wife (1st plaintiff) and her brother (2nd plaintiff) under the Will dtd. 6/9/1998. Venkataraja Konar died on 2/10/1998 at CMC Hospital, Vellore. His body was brought to the Rice Mill premises for homage. The first plaintiff, as his wife, conducted the last rites of Venkataraj Konar. A few days later, the defendants, with the intention to deprive the plaintiffs of their lawful right in the property of Venkataraja Konar, issued a public notice denying the marital relationship of the first plaintiff with the deceased Venkataraja Konar. They started propagating that Venkataraja Konar died a bachelor. Hence, the plaintiffs were constrained to file the present suit for partition.
(3.) The defendants contested the suit on the ground that the first plaintiff, Alamelu, is not the wife of Venkataraja Konar. The first plaintiff and her brother, who is the second plaintiff, were engaged by Vekataraja Konar to assist in running the Rice Mill. They were permitted to stay in the mill premises for that purpose. Venkataraja Konar never stayed in the Mill premises nor lived with the first plaintiff as her husband. The alleged marriage of Venkataraja Konar with Alamelu (first plaintiff) is denied. The Will purportedly executed by Venkataraja Konar in favour of the plaintiffs is also denied as false and fabricated. The relief sought in the suit :-