S.SENTHILKUMAR Vs. A.R.VENKIDUSAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these matters, the three wills said to have been executed by A.M.Rangasamy Gounder dated 04.06.1999, 15.02.2000, 29.08.2000 are put in issue. It is not in dispute that by way of the registered partition deed dated 24.02.1974 executed between A.M.Rangasamy Gounder and his two sons A.R.Vengudusamy and A.R.Viswanathan, the properties covered in the abovesaid three wills are allotted to the share of A.M.Rangasamy Gounder . It is also not in dispute that A.M. Rangasamy Gounder died on 12.11.2000 and that he had two sons, namely, A.R.Vengudusamy and A.R.Viswanathan and one daughter by name Easwari. Kuppayammal is the wife of A.R.Vengudusamy and A.V.Jeganathan is the son of A.R.Vengudusamy and Kuppayammal. A.V.Ramamurthy is the son of A.R.Viswanathan and A.V.Ramamurthy has died and he is survived by his wife Shenbagam and daughter Sowmya. Senthil Kumar is the son of Easwari.

(2.) The suit in O.S.No.64 of 2001 has come to be laid by A.V.Jeganathan and A.V.Ramamurthy against Senthil Kumar and others for declaring that the will dated 04.06.1999 is the last, genuine and valid testament of the deceased A.M.Rangasamy Gounder and for the consequential permanent injunction. The abovesaid suit has been stoutly resisted by Senthil Kumar contending that the will dated 04.06.1999 had been revoked by A.M.Rangasamy Gounder by a will dated 15.02.2000 and also further pleaded that the will dated 15.02.2000 had also been cancelled and revoked by the testator by way of another will dated 29.08.2000 and accordingly contended that the plaintiffs in O.S.No.64 of 2001 are not entitled to obtain the reliefs prayed for. It is found that pending suit, the second plaintiff A.V.Ramamurthy having died, his wife and daughter having not joined hands with the surviving plaintiff A.V.Jeganathan, it is found that Shenbagam and minor Sowmya, the legal representatives of the deceased A.V.Ramamurthy had been arrayed as the defendants 7 and 8 in the abovesaid suit and they have filed the written statement supporting the will dated 29.08.2000 and accordingly it is seen that they had sailed along with Senthil Kumar in contending that it is only the will dated 29.08.2000 which is the last will of the deceased A.M. Rangasamy Gounder.

(3.) The Suit in O.S.No.87 of 2001 has been laid by Senthil Kumar against A.V.Jaganathan and Shenbagum for the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the suit properties described therein and for obtaining the said relief, he relied only upon the will dated 29.08.2000. A.V.Jaganathan, the first defendant in the abovesaid suit has challenged the truth and validity of the will dated 29.08.2000 contending that the abovesaid suit of Senthil Kumar is only laid as a counter blast to the suit laid by him in O.S.No.64 of 2001 and accordingly prayed for the dismissal of the said suit. Shenbagum, the second defendant had supported the case of Senthil Kumar in the said suit. It is found that Senthil Kumar has laid the suit against A.R.Vengudusamy in O.S.No.299 of 2001 for evicting him from the suit property by pleading the landlord tenant relationship between the two parties. For claiming the ownership of the property in dispute, he has relied upon the will dated 29.08.2000 and the defendant A.R.Vengudusamy has challenged the truth and validity of the abovesaid will and contended that Senthil Kumar is not the owner of the property described therein and therefore, not entitled to seek and obtain the reliefs as prayed for in the said suit.