S RAJAPALANI Vs. D BABU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff originally filed O.P.No. 26 of 2002 seeking grant of letters of administration. As the defendant filed caveat on 11.4.2003, the Original Petition was converted into Testamentary Original Suit.

(2.) The plaintiff would submit that Arumugam who is the great great great grandfather of the plaintiff executed his last Will on 20.1.1901. It was registered in the Sub Registrar's Office, Cuddalore. He bequeathed one item of property to his only son A. Deivasigamani. He is no more and he died many years ago. The particulars of the wife and children of Deivasigamani are not known to the plaintiff due to efflux of time. As per the directions in the Will, the bequest goes to the hands of Duraisami, the second son of the Testator's elder sister. No one was appointed as executor under the said Will. As there was no issues to Deivasigamani, the plaint schedule property is succeeded by Duraisami, the second son of the Testator's elder sister. The said Duraisami is the grandfather of the plaintiff herein. Duraisami and his wife died many years ago. Six children were born to Duraisami. Mrs. Radhabai Animal, one of the daughters of Duraisami is the mother of the plaintiff. The plaintiff, inspite of his diligent enquiry, is unable to trace the particulars of the legal heirs of the other children of Duraisami. Iyyappan is the son of the plaintiff's deceased elder sister, who died many years ago. The said Iyyappan and the plaintiff are the only legal heirs. Further, the mother of the said Iyyappan is not entitled to any share in the estate' of the deceased in accordance with the Hindu Succession Act. Therefore, the said Iyyappan is also not entitled to any share in the estate of the deceased. It is impossible to confirm the death of the attesting witnesses. Radhabai Ammal, mother of the plaintiff resided permanently in Chennai and died intestate on 13.7.2001. This court has jurisdiction to deal with the present proceedings under Section 300 of the Indian Succession Act. The suit has been filed within time from the date of death of S. Radhabai Ammal. Therefore, the plaintiff prays for grant of letters of administration.

(3.) The defendant filed written statement contending that the plaintiff has not chosen to include the true legal heirs of the deceased Arumugam Pillai. The suit itself is not maintainable as the Will was allegedly executed much prior to the commencement of the Indian Succession Act. The suit is hopelessly barred by limitation and it suffers from laches. The genealogical tree submitted by the plaintiff is totally false. It is denied that A. Deivasigamani is the only son of the deceased Arumugam. Dr. Balasundaram is not the son of Duraisami Mudaliar, but, he is the husband of Sivakamavalli who is the daughter of Duraisami Mudaliar. The defendant is the son of Dhandapani who is the son of Duraisami Mudaliar. S. Ganapathy, the other son of Duraisami Mudaliar died leaving behind him his only son Ramanathan who died leaving behind him two daughters sivakamavalli also died leaving behind two sons of by name Sundaram and Sivaprakasam. The plaintiff has suppressed all the material facts about the legal heirs and filed the present petition for grant of letters of administration. The plaint mentioned property has to be succeeded only by the legal heirs of the deceased sons of Duraisami Mudaliar. The defendant and the granddaughters of Ganapathy are the legal heirs to succeed to the estate of the deceased Duraisami Mudaliar in exclusion of the plaintiff and other persons. Relating to the Trust created by Arummgam by virtue of the Will dated 20.1.2001, many litigations have sprung before the courts in Cuddalore District. The defendant, therefore, pray that the suit may be dismissed with costs.