SC decides a law suit that started in 1955

Satya Prakash
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, July 18

The snail-paced Indian judicial system is known for taking decades to bring the curtains down on a dispute.

On Friday, the Supreme Court decided a case that started in the year 1955 in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, over a will and went on for 65 years at various levels of the hierarchy of courts.

A Bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul dismissed appeals challenging a 2007 judgment of the Madras High Court with regard to a family dispute that revolved around a will but actually related to a partition in the Naidu family in 1932.

To understand the case, it’s important to know the family tree of the Naidus. One R Venkitusamy Naidu had two sons—Lakshmiah and Rangaswami. Rangaswami was married to R Krishnammal. The couple had no children. But Lakshmiah had four sons—Bakthavatsalam, Venkatapathy, Jagannathan and Ramaswamy.

After Rangaswami’s death, a ‘possession’ dispute started in 1955. Rangaswami’s widow and nephew on one side and  Lakshmiah and his sons on the other started a legal fight.  

The wife claimed Rangaswami died after executing a ‘will’. But a magistrate decided in favour of Lakshmiah, holding that they were in possession. The magistrate didn’t discuss the ‘will’.

A suit was filed in 1958 by Rangaswami’s widow ended in a compromise decree. Two other family members filed a suit in 1963 that resulted in another compromise decree. 

After Ramaswamy and Krishnammal died in 1976 and 1977, respectively, a suit was again filed for partition by A. Alagiriswami and partition was ordered by the sub-judge in Coimbatore. 

In 1982, Lakshmiah Naidu’s sons, widow and Ramaswamy’s daughters filed a suit for declaration of title and injunction against A Alagiriswami after he sold the property on the basis of a will by Rangaswami. The suit was tried along with a suit for partition filed by Alagiriswami in 1983.

The legal heirs of Lakshmiah questioned the will on the ground that it was obtained by coercion. Their suit was decreed but the first appellate court reversed these findings. Both the courts held there was no proof of the 1932 partition.

In 2007, the Madras High Court allowed the second appeal and restored the decree of the trial court. It was this HC order which was under challenge before the top court which concluded that the ‘will’ was indeed executed by R Naidu as his last will.