CHANDRAKANTHARAJ, J. ( 1 ) THIS is a third defendant's appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 27-7-1988 passed by the learned Civil Judge, mangalore in O. S, 61 of 1988 on his file. ( 2 ) THE brief facts which are required to be stated for a fast disposal of this appeal are as follows: the plaintiff filed the suit for possession of certain immovable and movable properties in which she had acquired a life interest under testamentary disposition of her late husband. Defendant No. 1 - her eldest son was the executor named in the will. Defendants 2 and 3 were her other sons. Defendant-4 is her daughter. Other defendants have jural relationship as persons in possession of some of the suit schedule properties. Her prayer in the suit was for possession of immovable properties as well as two taxi cabs, movables, bequeathed to her by her late husband, which were not given possession even after probate of the will by the 1st defendant - executor of the Will. ( 3 ) IT is most unfortunate that the suit was allowed to progress in the trial Court when the relief should have been sought under the provisions of Indian Succession Act to remove the executor and appoint another to give effect to the terms of the will under Section 301 of the Indian Succession Act. Much time has been wasted in the Court of Civil judge seeking the reliefs. ( 4 ) HOWEVER, plaintiff died. Soon thereafter the 3rd defendant made an application for transposing himself as the plaintiff, claiming to be one of the heirs and also a beneficiary - executor under the Will left behind by the plaintiff. His application has been dismissed as well as the suit as having abated. Therefore, the present appeal by the 3rd defendant. ( 5 ) WE do not see any merit in the appeal. If the deceased plaintiff has left a Will disposing of all her estate, her Will should be probated. Third defendant and deceased plaintiff being Christians, once such probate is granted, all other things will follow under the provisions of the Indian Succession Act. Question of transposing himself as plaintiff does not arise. If the deceased plaintiff has left a Will disposing of all her estate, her Will should be probated. Third defendant and deceased plaintiff being Christians, once such probate is granted, all other things will follow under the provisions of the Indian Succession Act. Question of transposing himself as plaintiff does not arise. The mere fact that certain monies were due to him if accounts were rendered by the executor, does not ipso-facto follow that the 3rd defendant is entitled to that money and therefore acquires the right to transpose himself to the position of the plaintiff. All her heirs are normal successors though her interests whatever they were heritable in accordance with law applicable to Christians of India. If she has made testamentary disposition in a different manner, then the only course to avoid normal succession according to law is to probate the will. ( 6 ) THE order made by the trial Court is correct both in dismissing the application for transposition as well as on the ground that plaintiffs cause of action died with her and therefore, the suit abated. ( 7 ) WE see no merit in the appeal and we dismiss the same subject to the observations. Appeal dismissed. --- *** --- .