Summary: The High Court of Madras decided on a family property argument involving a release document that was found to be invalid because of dishonesty. The court determined that D. Singaravelu and his daughters deserved their portion of the property.
In a case about a family argument over property, D. Singaravelu and his daughters took legal action against Vedavalli and others. Krishnasami Pillai died on August 4, 1990, leaving property in Karaikal and Mahe, Seychelles. The plaintiffs said they deserved a share of the property.
Vedavalli claimed that a release document dated October 8, 1990, signed by the plaintiffs, gave their rights to her. The plaintiffs argued that this document was obtained through lies and trickery. They said they didn't know about the document until 2006 when a disagreement about the property started.
"The plaintiffs believed Vedavalli would not break the trust and faith placed in her," the court noted.
The court found that the release document was indeed obtained through lies. The plaintiffs had not truly agreed to give up their rights. The court decided that the document was invalid and did not affect the plaintiffs.
Vedavalli appealed, saying the plaintiffs couldn't challenge the document without asking for it to be canceled. However, the court agreed with the earlier decision, stating that the plaintiffs could ignore the document because it was based on dishonesty.
"The trial court rightly held Ex.B26 not a valid document," the judgment stated.
In the end, the court decided in favor of the plaintiffs, giving them 6/7 of the property. The appeals by the defendants were rejected, and the plaintiffs were recognized as rightful co-owners.
