RENGASAMY Vs. RUGMINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner/5th defendant against the judgment and decree dated 12.10.2004 made in C.M.A No. 5 of 2004 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kuzhithurai, reversing the Order and decretal order dated 13.1.2004 passed in I.A. No. 759 of 1998 in O.S. No. 37 of 1990 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.

(2.) THE short facts of the case is as follows:

(3.) THE Court below has given a finding in the impugned judgment passed in the C.M.A. that even the revision petitioner, who was examined as P.W.1 had deposed that he did not accompany his mother, Ammalu Nadathi while the alleged Will was executed by her. THE Sub-Registrar who registered the Will was examined as P.W.4 and he has deposed in his chief-examination that the Will was registered at Karur Sub-Registrar's Office by him on 31.1.1992, while he was the Sub-Registrar of the said Office. In his cross-examination, he has admitted that he had never seen Ammalu Nadathi prior to the execution that he had never seen Ammalu Nadathi prior to the execution of the Will and he could not correctly say whether the person signed in the Will was Ammalu Nadathi or not. THErefore, as contended by the learned counsel for the respondents, the revision petitioner, being the profounder of the Will has to prove the factum of execution of the Will, as per Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act that it was executed by the Ammalu Nadathi.