JOSEPHINE JEROME Vs. S SANTIAGO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is directed against the Judgment in T. O. S. No. 27 of 1997 dated 20. 12. 2000. Aggrieved over the grant of probate of the Will executed by the testatrix, viz. , late Mary Santiago, the Defendants have preferred this Appeal.

(2.) THE parties are related as under: Mary Santiago (died on 25. 10. 1994) S. Santiago (P. 1) Late S. Eric Jerome Josephine Nirmala Augustin S. Thomas (died on 29. 6. 95) (P. 2) Josephine Jerome (D. 1) Emanuvel Antony Julith MosesSandanaraj (D. 3) (D. 4) (D. 2) THE case of the Plaintiffs'is that Mary Santiago left behind a Will dated 08. 07. 1994, where under, she had made a bequest granting life estate to her husband-First Plaintiff and absolute estate to the Second plaintiff, who is the ultimate beneficiary. After the death of Mary Santiago, the Plaintiffs had filed O. P. No. 748/95 for issuance of probate of the Will. THE Appellants/defendants filed caveat and therefore, O. P. No. 748/95 was converted to T. O. S. No. 27/1997 alleging that disposition made under the Will was unnatural disposition. THE Plaintiffs sought probate of the Will. THE defendants contested the Suit alleging that the Will is not a true, valid and genuine one and that the Plaintiffs have committed forgery and the purported will is not a natural Will. THE Defendants inter alia contended that Mary santiago had already left behind a registered Will dated 23. 3. 1990 and the testatrix never intended to cancel the Will. It was further alleged that the will is surrounded by several suspicious circumstances and therefore, the probate should not be granted.

(3.) DISCUSSING all the issues together, on the evidence of attesters (P. Ws. 1 and 2), the learned Single Judge held that at the time of execution of the Will the testatrix was in a sound disposing state of mind. Referring to various points the learned Single Judge concluded that the alleged suspicious circumstances are dispelled by the Plaintiffs. The learned Single judge took the view that mere presence of the propounder would not show that they have actually participated. It was also held that another son Jerome and daughter were sufficiently provided for and there is nothing unnatural in excluding them by the testatrix.