Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 180 (MAD)

T. Naresh v. G. Srinivas

2021-01-18

N.KIRUBAKARAN, P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

body2021
JUDGMENT : N. Kirubakaran, J. (Prayer: Original Side Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 11 of Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order and decreetal order dated 09.07.2019 passed in Appl.No.4119 of 2015 in O.P.No.408 of 2014.) 1. The matter was heard through “Video Conference”. 2. This Original Side Appeal has been filed against the allowing of Application filed by the Respondent and his mother to revoke the probate granted in favour of the Appellants in respect of the Will dated 27.03.1998 executed by G.Parvathi W/o.G.Ramakrishna. 3. The property bearing Old No.19, New No.41, situated at Rajamannar Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017 stood in the name of G.Parvathi W/o.G.Ramakrishna who was a Telugu Cinema Actor. G.Parvathi was the first wife of G.Ramakrishna and she died on 24.04.1998 and subsequently, Mr.G.Ramakrishna also died. The Appellants, being the brother’s grand children of G.Parvathi, approached this Court stating that G.Parvathi left behind a Will dated 27.03.1998 which was registered as Document No.27 of 1998 before the concerned Registration Authorities, bequeathing the property in their favour. The said Original Petition was numbered as O.P.No.408 of 2014. After following the procedures, the said Original Petition was ordered and the probate was granted by this Court by order dated 23.05.2015. 4. To set aside the said grant of probate in favour of the Appellants, the Respondent herein and his mother filed an application in A.No.4119 of 2015 stating that they are the son and second wife of G.Ramakrishna. The said application was allowed stating that no notice was given to the Respondent herein. 5. The case of the Respondent is that, firstly, G.Ramakrishna married G.Parvathi. Subsequently, he married Geethanjali and out of the wedlock, the Respondent was born. His father purchased a property bearing Old No.19, New No.41, situated at Rajamannar Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017 in the name of G.Parvathi. Since G.Parvathi, the first wife died on 24.04.1998, the property became the property of G.Ramakrishna. 6. Subsequently, G.Ramakrishna died intestate on 23.10.2001. After his death, the aforesaid property was inherited by the Respondent and his mother viz., Geethanjali. However, Geethanjali executed a release deed on 21.12.2012 in favour of the Respondent and the same was registered as Document No.432 of 2013 on the file of Sub-Registrar Office, Thyagarayanagar, relinquishing her undivided half share over the property. Subsequently, G.Ramakrishna died intestate on 23.10.2001. After his death, the aforesaid property was inherited by the Respondent and his mother viz., Geethanjali. However, Geethanjali executed a release deed on 21.12.2012 in favour of the Respondent and the same was registered as Document No.432 of 2013 on the file of Sub-Registrar Office, Thyagarayanagar, relinquishing her undivided half share over the property. Therefore, the Respondent claimed that he is the absolute owner of the property. However, he entered into an agreement on 28.02.2013 with a third party for sale of the said property and the same was registered as Document No.511 of 2013 on the file of Sub-Registrar Office, Thyagarayanagar. 7. Based on the complaint given by the First Appellant, notice dated 01.06.2015 was received by the Respondent from the Office of the District Registrar, Saidapet, Chennai, demanding cancellation of the document executed by the Respondent. Thereafter only, the Respondent came to know that the Appellants filed O.P.No.408 of 2014 and got probate of the Will executed by G.Parvathi, the first wife of G.Ramakrishna. Since no notice was given, the Respondent and his mother filed an application in A.No.4119 of 2015 seeking revocation of probate. The said probate was revoked by allowing the said application. Against the allowing of the application taken out by the Respondent and his mother, the present Appeal has been filed. 8. When the matter is called today, the Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that a Joint Memo of Compromise dated 08.01.2021 has been filed. Further, G.Srinivas, the Respondent appeared before this Court through Video Conference from Hyderabad and stated that he wants to give up the objections made by him for grant of probate of the last Will of G.Parvathi dated 27.03.1998 and he irrevocably relinquishes any right with regard to the property bearing Old No.19, New No.41, situated at Rajamannar Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017, by admitting and acknowledging that the Appellants are the absolute and exclusive joint owners of the property, being the legatees of the deceased G.Parvathi. Therefore, he has got no objection with regard to the confirmation of the probate granted in favour of the Appellants. 9. Therefore, he has got no objection with regard to the confirmation of the probate granted in favour of the Appellants. 9. Since, the Statement has been made by the Respondent viz., G.Srinivas himself, stating that he is convinced with the joint memo of compromise filed by both the parties and counter signed by their respective Counsels, the appeal filed by the Appellants are disposed of in terms of joint memorandum of compromise. Accordingly the application filed in A.No.499 of 2015 stands dismissed and consequently, the order dated 09.07.2019 is set aside. The joint memorandum of compromise dated 08.01.2021 shall form part of the Judgment and decree. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.