CHAKRAVARTHI NAINAR Vs. PUSHPAVATHI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After giving this matter my very careful consideration, I am satisfied that the decision of the learned Judge is correct, that he has committed no error of law, and that I cannot interfere with his judgment in second appeal. He had a very difficult task to perform and I think he performed it well.

(2.) One Marudappa died leaving a Will in favour of his mother, and the present suit has been filed by a reversionary heir attacking the Will. The plaintiff's case is that Marudappa was a minor at the date of his death and was thus not competent to make a Will. The question to be determined is, therefore, whether Marudappa was a minor or a major at the time of his death. The learned District Judge has come to the conclusion that he was a major, and I am asked to decide, whether his decision is vitiated by any error of law. I am satisfied that it is not.

(3.) Exhibit 2 which has been relied on by the District Judge establishes that Marudappa was born in the year 1900 and was thus a major at the date of his death. As the learned Judge points out there can be no doubt that it is genuine, because Narayana Pillai, the Village Munsif of Vippedu, the place where the testator was born, ia whose hand writing Ex, 2 is, died long ago, that is, in 1902, and it is impossible to suggest that the document was fabricated for purposes of the suit. Even P.W. 2 admits that Ex. 2 is in the handwriting of Narayana Pillai. This exhibit purports to be a copy of the Birth Register for 1900. The original Birth Register was not produced although the defendants took every possible step in order to cause its production. The Karnam, P.W. 2, who produced the Birth Registers for several years as well, as a Death Register, says that he is unable to produce the Birth Register for the year 1900, the year in question. The District Judge seems to suspect the bona fides of this witness. I agree with him that strong suspicion attaches to the non-production of the original Birth Register for the year 1900. It is in these circumstances that the defence had to rely upon Ex. 2 which purports to be a copy of that Birth Register.