V VENKATANARAYANA PILLAY Vs. VSUBBAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for their Lordships decision arises upon a petition for substitution of the petitioner in place of the deceased appellant, Venkatanarayana, who has died since the filing of his appeal to His Majesty in Council.

(2.) Venkatanarayana brought a suit, on the 29th of July 1907, in the High Court of Madras in its ordinary civil jurisdiction to obtain a declaration that the adoption of the second defendant by Subbammal, the first defendant, was invalid, and did not affect his (Venkatanarayana s) reversionary interest in the ancestral estate of one Venkatakrishna, deceased. Subbammal, in her answer, alleged that the adoption which the plaintiff sought to set aside was made by her under the authority of her husband given under a will. The plaintiff, on the other hand, contended that the authority so given was revoked by a subsequent will. The Courts in India have held on the construction of this document that it did not amount to a revocation. Venkatanarayana, after the decision of the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction dismissing his suit, applied for the usual certificate to appeal to His Majesty in Council, which was duly granted, and an appeal was filed and was pending when he died on the 19th of November 1913.

(3.) The petitioner Kuppusami Pillay applies to be substituted in the place of the deceased appellant and for an order for revivor of the appeal and for leave to prosecute it " in the usual way." He alleges that Venkatanarayana in his lifetime was a member of a joint undivided Hindu family consisting of himself, two sons, and two grandsons, one of whom was the petitioner; and that he was now the sole surviving member thereof, and entitled to the reversionary interest in Venkatakrishna s ancestral properties.