Valsa Jose Vs V.B. Chandran (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court considered O.S.A.Nos.84 and 85 of 2020 arising from the common judgment dated 04.09.2019 in T.O.S.No.56 of 2013 and C.S.No.1090 of 2008. Valsa Jose was the plaintiff in C.S.No.1090 of 2008 and defendant in the testamentary proceedings. She claimed a 1/3rd share in the suit property, alleging that her father, K.K.Dominic, had purchased the property in 1963 in the name of T.P.Davessy as a benami transaction. She contended that the subsequent Settlement Deed dated 27.02.1970 in favour of Theyamma did not confer valid title and disputed the Will dated 31.07.2006 executed by Theyamma.
The appellant also alleged that Theyamma was of advanced age, had poor health and eyesight, and was incapable of validly executing the Will. She challenged the proof of execution and attestation and relied on several alleged suspicious circumstances. She further contended that the transaction fell within the fiduciary exception under Section 4(3)(b) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.
The respondent maintained that T.P.Davessy had purchased the property in 1963 and subsequently settled it in favour of Theyamma in 1970, making her the absolute owner. It was submitted that Theyamma executed a registered Will appointing the respondent as executor and directing sale of the property and distribution of the proceeds among beneficiaries and charitable institutions.
