GOMATHI ANIMAL Vs. PITCHAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1st defendant in O. S. No. 390 of 1977 on the file of the district Munsif, Ambasamudram, is the appellant. After filing the appeal, she died and appellants 2 to 6 are brought on record as additional appellants.

(2.) PLAINTIFFS filed the above suit for declaration of their right over the plaint scheduled properties and for consequent reliefs including mesne profits.

(3.) BEFORE proceeding to deal with the questions of law, it is relevant to consider the wordings under the Will. From the above, it is clear that Ramanathan, son of venkataraman, will be entitled to a right of enjoy- ment for his life along with the other male issues to be born to Venkataraman, without any right of encumbrance and thereafter, their male issues will be entitled to the properties with absolute power of disposal. The question that has to be considered is, when does the succession open. According to the appellant, the succession opened only in the year 1965, when Ramanathan died, whereas, according to the plaintiffs, the succession opened immediately after krishnaswami Iyer died. If the contention of the appellant is accepted, she is also entitled to a share in the property. At the same time, if the case of the plaintiffs is accepted, the appeal has only to-be decided upholding the decision of the courts below.