M.S. MANIKAVASAGAM Vs. M.M. RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal has been filed at the instance of the plaintiff in O.S.No.3033 of 2016. The said suit was filed by the plaintiff seeking a declaration that the settlement deed executed by him on 23.06.2004 in favour of the defendant is null and void as the same was executed under coercion and undue influence and also for a declaration that the revocation of settlement deed executed by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant which was registered as Doc. No.350/2015 in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Konnur is valid.

(2.) The defendant is the son of the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff, the defendant being the eldest son of the plaintiff was living with him whereas the other children were living away. During the year 2004, the defendant harassed the plaintiff and his wife and forced him to settle the property in his favour. It was under such coercion and undue influence the plaintiff executed the settlement deed dated 23.06.2004 and the same was registered as Doc. No.3135/2004 in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Konnur. It is also claimed that coercion is writ large in the face of the document itself. Certain facts like no shares allotted to other children and the value of the property has been under-stated and other grounds were raised.

(3.) The defendant resisted the suit contending that the settlement deed was executed by the plaintiff on his own will and volition. It was also pointed out that the defendant was working in Kaziabad at the time of execution of the document i.e., 23.06.2004, therefore, according to the defendant, there was no question of him exercising any coercion or undue influence on the plaintiff.