HUSSEINALI CASAM MAHOMED Vs. DINBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plain tiff filed this suit against the defendants as executors of the last will of one Jumabhai Sheriff claiming two separate sums of Rs. 10,000 with interest at six per cent, from the death of Jumabhai, under a document alleged to have been executed by Jumabhai on January 18, 1919, which ran as follows: Bai Dinbai-Owing to my health becoming weaker day by day I give you this paper in writing of my free will that you will kindly accept Rs. 10,000 for the fee for the nursing which you have done for me and my family for ten to twelve years and Rs. 10,000 as a paltry present from me in all Rs. 20,000 to be paid after my death out of my estate.

(2.) She also alleged that the deceased made an oral will in her favour. The defendants pleaded that the plaintiff only attended on the deceased as a nurse when he was suffering from typhoid fever for which she was fully paid. The relations between the plaintiff and the deceased were otherwise of an immoral character. They denied that the document sued on was executed by the deceased or that any oral will was made in plaintiff's favour. They contended that the alleged settlement was void for want of consideration, but in any event it was of a testamentary character and was revoked by the will. The claim to the second Rs. 10,000 was afterwards abandoned by the plaintiff. The learned Judge who heard the case decided- (1) That the plaintiff was occasionally employed by the deceased as a nurse. (2) That there was a settlement of her fees at Rs. 10,000. (3) That Jumabhai directed that the plaintiff should be paid Rs. 10,000 after his death. (4) That the plaintiff could recover Rs 10,000 (5) That Jumabhai executed the document of January 18, 1919. (6) That it was not void for want of consideration for immorality or undue influence. (7) That the document of January 18, 1919 was not of a testamentary character, and was not revoked by the will. (8) That the deceased had not made an oral will. (9) That the letters Exh. D to the plaint were written by the deceased. (10) That the plaintiff had not been fully paid for her and passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff for Rs. 10,000 with interest at six per cent, from the date of Jumabhai-s death with costs and interest on judgment

(3.) The defendants have appealed.