VALLIAMMAL Vs. PALANIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the issues involved in both the appeals are one and the same, the appeals may be disposed of by the following common judgment.

(2.) DEFENDANTS in O.S.No.531 of 1980 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Madurai are the appellants in A.S.No.258 of 1084. Plaintiff in O.S.No.489 of 1980 on the file of the same court is the appellant in Transfer Appeal No.837 of 1991.

(3.) AS stated earlier, in O.S.No.531 of 1980 the plain- tiffs (defendants 1 and 2 in the other suit, namely, O.S.No.489 of 1980) prayed for a preliminary decree declaring that plaintiffs are entitled to 2/3rd share in the plaint schedule properties. Since the pleadings of both parties in O.S.No.489 of 1980 are similar to that in O.S.No.531 of 1980, 1 am not referring the same once again. By filing joint memo, common evidence was let in in O.S.No.489 of 1980. Hence the parties are referred to as per their rank in O.S.No.489 of 1980. In other words, the plaintiff in O.S.No.489 of 1980 is referred to as plaintiff and defendants in the said suit are referred as defendants in the common proceedings. The plaintiff has examined 6 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 6 and marked Exs. A-1 to A-19 in support of his claim. On the side of the defendants, D.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.B-1 and B-2 were marked in support of their defence. Exs.C-1 and C-2 were marked as court documents. In the light of the above pleadings, after forking necessary issues and in the light of the evidence let in by both sides, the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Madurai, after holding that the will Ex.A-3 has not been validly executed, dismissed the suit O.S.No.489 of 1980 and decreed the suit filed by the defendants 1 and 2, namely, O.S.No.531 of 1980. Aggrieved by the said decrees, the unsuccessful plaintiff in O.S.No.489 of 1980 and defendants in O.S.No.531 of 1980 filed the present appeals as stated above.