OP/60/2026 of K.M.K. Arjun @ Arjun Kondamani Vs K.M.K. Achuth on 16 October 2026

ORDER

Heard Mr.J.Balachander, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.T.I.Ramanathan, learned counsel for the third parties.

2. This Original Petition has been filed for grant of Letters of Administration of the last Will and testament of one late Mrs.M.Girija. The petitioner and the respondent are the sons respectively of the deceased Testatrix. The petitioner and the respondent claim that their mother late M.Girija, died on 19.07.2004, leaving behind her, a last Will and Testament, dated 03.03.1986. Though the deceased Girija, had appointed her sister, one Mrs.R.Sarojini as her sole Executrix under the Will, the said Sarojini, died on 22.10.2018 and therefore as one of beneficiaries, the petitioner has now come forward seeking grant of Letters of Administration, considering the fact that the Executor has passed away in the interregnum period.

3. The petitioner has examined himself as P.W.1 and has marked Exhibits P1 to P10. The general paper publication as required under the provisions of the Indian Succession Act has also been effected and copies of the publications, one in English and one in Tamil have also been filed. One of the attesting witnesses, in fact, a partner of a reputed Law Firm, Mr.T.S.Sridharan, has been examined as P.W2. His evidence is placed before me for perusal. On going through the

proof affidavit of P.W.1, Ex.P1 to Ex.P10, petition averments and evidence of P.W.2, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of Letters of Administration, having established the factum of the death of his mother, M.Girija and also the factum of the last Will and Testament having been left behind by her and the said Will coming into force on her demise. With the evidence of P.W.2, T.S.Sridharan, I am satisfied that the Will has been duly proved to be executed and attested as required under Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act r/w Section 67 of BSA (Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act).

4. At this juncture, Mr.T.I.Ramanathan, leaned counsel appearing for a third party, raised serious objections, contending that he has filed an impleading application and he intends to bring up the same and he would therefore seek for the matter being adjourned without any orders being passed. I have heard Mr.T.I.Ramanathan, leaned counsel and his objections as well. It is the contention of Mr.T.I.Ramanathan, leaned counsel that the applicant who seeking to implead himself, is the actual owner of the property, viz., S.Nos.166/1, 166/3 & 167/1 (1 acre 57 cents, 0.62 cents and 2 acres 43 cents) totalling in all 4 acres 62 cents at Oorappakkam Village now Vandalur Firka Taluk, Chengalpattu, which has been bequeathed to the petitioner and the respondent under the last Will and Testament of late.M.Girija. He also brings to my notice that Civil Suits are pending before the Chengalpattu Court, one filed

by the third party, R.Muthulingam, in O.S. No.276 of 2022 which is pending before the Principal District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu. Copy of the plaint in the said suit is also made available for my perusal and I find that in the said suit, the third party only prays for permanent injunction to restrain the petitioner and the respondent herein from any manner interfering with the alleged possession of the third party, viz., Mr.Muthulingam.

5. On going through the plaint averments and allegations, I find that the said proposed party, R.Muthulingam, S/o.M.R.Ramasamy, is claiming that one M.Girija, D/o.K.Ramanujam, sold the property in and by registered sale deed dated No.1142 of 1974, in favour of one C.Muthusamy, from whom the applicant the property purchased under Doc. No.387 of 1987, dated 20.02.1987. However, it is the case of the petitioner and the respondent that their mother Girija is the daughter of K.A.Ramachar and therefore, clearly there is an identity dispute with regard to the deceased person, Girija.

6. The scope of a probate petition before the Probate Court is only to see whether the Testator or Testatrix died, leaving behind a testamentary instrument and on his/her demise, the said testamentary instrument takes effect or not and also, if there is any objection with regard to the truth and genuineness of such Will being taken in the manner as contemplated under the Original Side Rules, then alone, the said objections can be tested before this Court. Any other issues

touching the title of the property is outside the scope and realm of the probate Court. Therefore, I do not see any purpose in entertaining the Application filed by Mr.R.Muthlingam for merely impleading himself, even without satisfying the other requirements under the Original Side Rules of the Madras High Court. There is no purpose in entertaining the impleading Application for the mere asking. One more request is that it is only in respect of one of the items left behind by the Testatrix, a dispute is pending in the Civil Court and not with respect to the other assets.

7. In fact, though Mr.T.I.Ramanathan, leaned counsel, strongly and vehemently contended that the petitioner and the respondents have no right, title and interest, in the property that has already been sold by the Testatrox. late M.Girija, daughter of one Ramanujam, to the vendor of the third party R.Muthulingam, who in turn had sold it to the third party, claiming that he had purchased it from one Girija, D/o.Ramanujam, however in the OP, the specific case of the petitioner and the respondent who are none else than the sons of Girija, is that the said Girija is the daughter of K.A.Ramachar and not Ramanujam. In any event, there are two Civil Suits pending in respect of the lands measuring 4 acres 62 cents at Oorapakkam Village. Mr.Balachandar, learned counsel for the petitioner also states that Criminal Proceedings has been filed against the said Muthulingam, where he has been arrayed as an Accused No.1, and his brother one Ramaganesh, has been arrayed as Accused No.2, and

that they are attempting to grab the valuable lands belonging to the petitioner and the respondent, who legitimately claim right under their mother, Girija, D/o.K.A.Ramachar and her last Will and Testament.

8. As far as the scope of the petition before me, I am satisfied that the petitioner has established the demise of the Testatrix Girija, leaving behind her last Will and Testament, and the said Will has also been proved as required under Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act r/w Section 67 of BSA (Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act).

9. It is needless to state that considering the two Civil Suits are pending, one filed by Mr.Muthulingam, O.S. No.279 of 2022, which is pending before the Principal District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu and the other filed by the petitioner and the respondent herein in O.S. No.223 of 2022, also pending before the Principal District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu for seeking cancellation of the collusive decree obtained pursuant to O.S. No.79 of 2019, before the Principal District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu. Admittedly, these suits relate to title, interest in the immovable property situate at Oorapakkam Village, which can be tested only before the competent Civil Court. As I have already found that there are two connected suits concerning one of the items bequeathed under the Will and that both the suits pending before the very same

Court viz., Principal District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu, I direct the learned Principal District Munsif, Chengalpattu to try both the suits above mentioned jointly, subject to completion of pleadings and disposal of all Interlocutory Applications. The trial of the suit shall be expedited and the suit shall be disposed on or before, 30.06.2027. It is needless to state that in the event of the third party Muthulingam, who has now come forward with an objection relating to title, ultimately, succeeding and his title, right and interest is established before the Civil Court, then it is always open to the petitioner to seek revocation of this grant invoking Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, limited to his right, title and interest being declared by the Civil Court.

10. Mr.Balachandar, learned counsel further states that with regard to the liberty to revocation should be limited to only one of the property in which Muthulingam claims right viz., 4 acres and 62 cents comprised in S.Nos.166/1, 166/3 & 167/1 (1 acre 57 cents, 0.62 cents and 2 acres 43 cents) totalling in all 4 acres 62 cents at Oorappakkam Village). It is needless to state that since, Muthulingam is not claiming any right under Girija, D/o.K.A.Ramachar, the Testatrix, in respect of all other movable and immovable items left behind by her, this grant would be conclusive.

11. In fine,

(i) This Original Petition is ordered and the Letters of Administration,

having effect throughout the State of Tamil Nadu, shall be issued in favour of the petitioner, with the Will dated 03.03.1986, annexed;

(ii) The petitioner is directed to duly administer the properties and credits of the deceased more fully described in the suit schedule;

(iii) The petitioner shall execute a security bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) in favour of the Assistant Registrar (O.S- II), High Court, Madras. In the event of the petitioner not being in India, the Power Agent of the Petitioner shall be permitted to execute the bond on his behalf.

(iv) The petitioner is further directed to make a full and true inventory of the property and credits of the deceased testatrix, late Mrs.M.Girija, to be made and the same be exhibited before this Court, within six months from the date of grant of Letters of Administration to them and also to render a true account of the property and credits of the testatrix, within one year from the date of obtaining the grant. It is also made clear that on the strength of the Letters granted by this Court, the petitioner and the respondent shall not take any undue advantage and they have to independently establish their title and right in the Oorapakkam Village in the pending suits. 16-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RKP

Witnesses examined on the side of the petitioner: P.W.1 – Mr.K.M.K.Arjun @ Arjun Kondamani P.W.2 – Mr.T.S.Sridharan Documents exhibited by the petitioner: Exhibits Description Ex.P1 Original Will dated 03.03.1986 executed by M.Girija Ex.P2 Computer generated death certificate of M.Girija. Ex.P3 The photocopy of the succession certificate in O.P. No.439 of 2013. (Compared with the original) Ex.P4 The computer generated death certificate of Sarojini Ramachar. Ex.P5 The certified copy of the sale deed dated 17.07.1982 executed by K.A.Ramachar in favour of M.Girija Ex.P6 The certified copy of the sale deed dated 14.09.1988 executed by K.A.Ramachar in favour of M.Girija. Ex.P7 The photocopy of my passport (Compared with the original). Ex.P8 (Series 2 Nos.) are the copies of the paper publication effected in one issue of Tamil daily "Makkal Kural" dated 24.07.2026 and in one issue of English daily "Trinity Mirror" dated 31.07.2026. Ex.P9 The certificate filed under Section 63(4)(C) of BSA. Ex.P10 Photocopy of P.W.2's Aadhaar Card. 16-10-2026 RKP

P.B.BALAJI, J. RKP OP No. 60 of 2026 16-10-2026