| Citation | |
| Keywords | |
| Facts | |
| Issues | |
| Contentions | |
| Law Points | |
| Judgment | |
| Ratio Decidendi & Case Authority |
Full Case Details
Facts
- The suit out of which the appeal has arisen was instituted in the name of Narasimha Bhatta who was stated to be of weak intellect by his next friend and daughter Adithiamma.
- By this deed of settlement the entire properties which were considerable were given to respondent No. 1, the plaintiff reserving only a life interest for himself besides making some provision for the maintenance of his wife Lakshmiamma.
- Respondent No. 1 was able to obtain benefits under the settlement deed for himself owing to the weak intellect and old age of the plaintiff.
Law Point
Trial court
- It was held that the plaintiff was a person of weak intellect and was not in a position to take care of himself and manage his affairs properly on the date of the execution of the aforesaid documents
The High Court
- Reversed the judgment of the Court below holding that the gift contained in Ex. B−3 was a spontaneous act of the plaintiff and he had exercised an independent will in the matter of its execution
Judgment
- The dispositions which were made by Ex. B−3, as already pointed out before, were altogether unnatural and no valid reason or explanation has been given why Narasimha Bhatta should have given everything to respondent No. 1 and even deprived himself of the right to deal with the property as an owner during his lifetime.
- All these facts and circumstances raised a grave suspicion as to the genuineness of the execution of the document Ex. B−3 and it was for respondent No. 1 to dispel the same. In our opinion he has entirely failed to do so with the result that the appeal must succeed and it is allowed with costs in this Court
