MOOKAYI AMMAL Vs. DURAISWAMY UDAYAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS 1 to 3 and 5 in O.S. No. 183 of 1976, on the file of District Munsif, Kallakurichi, are the appellants.

(2.) THE relevant facts of the case may be summarised thus: "

(3.) QUESTION Nos. 1 and 2 can be considered together. In fact the contention of benami and the contention that late Muthammal had executed a Will in respect of the plaint properties are really inconsistent. If the appellants wanted to claim a right under the Will, naturally they will have to admit the right of Muthammal over the property. On a reading of Ex.B8, I do not think that it could be construed as a will. A Will is a solemn document executed by a person whereby he bequeathes his properties with intent to come into effect after his death. It is always revocable at the volition of the executant. It is optionally registerable. In Ex.B8, I find that a right in praesenti is created and it further declares that the executant will have no right to cancel the same. These two stipulations in the deed create a doubt in the mind of the court, whether the document is a testamentary disposition or not.