K.K.SASIDHARAN, J. - (1.) THE second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.02.2001 in O.S. No. 90 of 1995 on the file of the District Munsif, Vilathikulam, as confirmed by the judgment and decree dated 08.01.2002 in A.S. No. 11 of 2001 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kovilpatti.
(2.) THE first respondent in the present appeal preferred a suit in O.S. No. 90 of 1995 before the trial Court for a decree of declaration and for recovery of possession in respect of the suit property. It is the case of the first respondent as plaintiff in the suit that the suit property originally belonged to his mother and the appellants herein being the defendants 1 and 2 in the suit are his sisters and his mother along with father executed a joint Will on 10.09.1981, whereby the schedule property was bequeathed in his favour. It is his further case that the mother died on 16.08.1990 and as such, the Will had come into force and accordingly, he prayed for declaration and recovery of possession, as the property was found to be in the possession of the appellants. In the written statement filed by the appellants as defendants in O.S. No. 90 of 1995, they did not admit the Will stated to have been executed on 10.09.1981 and it is their case that after the death of mother, their father executed a Will on 18.08.1991, whereby there was an equitable distribution of property among all the children and, therefore, it was the contention of the appellants that the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief as prayed for. The respondents 2 and 3 stated to be the assignee under the first respondent, were declared ex parte consequent to their non-appearance.
(3.) DURING the course of trial, the joint Will executed by Ramasamy and Nagammal, parents of the appellant, was marked as Ex.A.1. P.W.2 an attesting witness was examined to prove the Will. The Will dated 18.08.1991 executed by the father was marked as Ex.B.1 and the appellants examined D.W.2 to prove the Will.;