MEENAKSHIAMMAL Vs. RAMASAMY MUTHIRIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SECOND Appeal No.1583 of 1984 is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.146 of 1981, on the file of Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli. SECOND Appeal No.527 of 1991, is filed by the 1st defendant in O.S.No.1799 of 1984, on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli.

(2.) THE relevant facts in both these Second Appeals could he summarised thus:

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents in S.A.No.527 of 1991 contended that there is no evidence in this case to show that the settlement deed of 1943 was accepted. It is his case that the gift deed is 1943 is not simple gift, but it is either a conditional or onerous gift, and there is no presumption of acceptance. It is also his case that in the Will, there is a statement that the settlement deed has not come into effect, and there is no necessity for cancelling the same. LEARNED counsel also submitted the circumstances also are such that the settlement might not have been come into effect, and there is no evidence in this case to show that the donee-Janaki Ammal was paying tax to the property or maintaining the donor. According to the counsel, the statement in the Will must be taken as a prima facie evidence. How far the said contention could be accepted.