K R SUBRAMANIAN Vs. C R SUSILA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition has been filed to grant Letters of Administration on the basis of the unregistered Will executed by Tmt.K. Vijayalakshmi bequeathing the properties in favour of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the testatrix Tmt.K. Vijayalkshmi is the absolute owner of the property. Her husband one Mr.C. Kathirvel predeceased her on 07.09.2011. The said Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi executed the Will on 22.06.2013 bequeathing her entire properties to the petitioner. The respondent is the only sister of said Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi. Though she has not filed any caveat and written statement, she cross examined P.W.1 and P.W.2 extensively. On the side of the petitioner P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P.7 marked. On the side of the respondent though no witness was examined Ex.R1 to R14 were exhibited through the cross examination of P.Ws.

(2.) It is the contention of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that though the petitioner is stranger to the family of Tmt.K. Vijayalakshmi and her husband Mr.C.Kadirvel, he has been closely acquainted with them from the year 1960. Therefore he was all along treated as son of Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi and her husband Mr.C.Kathirvel. Even at the time of purchase of the property in the name of Mr.C.Kathirvel, he was cited as one of the witnesses. This fact clearly shows that the petitioner was all along considered as one of the family member of Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi and her husband Mr.C.Kathirvel. The respondent is the only sister of Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi. There was no love and affection of the sister as she is residing in Coimbatore. The petitioner was very closely associated with Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi and her husband Mr.C.Kathirvel and he was responsible for construction of their house. Even in the year 1984 an exclusive portion was constructed for the use of the petitioner and the petitioner was residing in the same property. Though the petitioner was married, he was residing separately in the suit property, which is the subject matter of the Will. Even during the life time of Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi and her husband Mr.C.Kathirvel the petitioner was treated as their son. After the death Mr.C. Kathirvel, last rites were performed by the petitioner. After the death of her husband, he has also taken care of Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi in all aspects including her health and treated her diabetes.

(3.) Taking into consideration of the love and affection shown by the petitioner, the deceased Tmt.K.Vijayalakshmi not only in respect of her own property but also the properties inherited from her husband, bequeathed the same to petitioner by a Will Ex.P.2 dated 22.06.2013 while she was in sound state of mind. After the execution of the Will merely because she has suffered some ailments and her toe and left leg were amputated cannot be a ground to suspect the Will. P.W.2, one of the attesting witnesses also clearly spoken about the Will. It is the further contention of the learned Senior Counsel that in the cross examination, the relationship of the petitioner with the Testatrix was not denied. Hence, the learned Senior Counsel submitted that merely because the petitioner is not related to the Testatrix and her husband, that cannot be the ground to disbelieve the Will, which is otherwise proved in the manner known to law. Hence, he prayed for grant of Letters of Administration in favour of the petitioner.