Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner / accused relying upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in

(i) Sardool Singh and Another -vs- Nasib Kaur [1987 (Supp) SCC 146],

(ii) M.Srikanth -vs- State of Telangana and others [MANU/SC/1446/2019],

(iii) Motilal Songara -vs- Prem Prakash [2013 (3) SCC (cri) 872] ,

(iv)Paamjeet Batra –vs- State of Uttarakhand and others [ 2013 (11) SCC 673 and (v) Kapil Agarwal & ors –vs- Sanjay Sharma [ 2021 (5) SCC 524] submitted that, the real dispute is between relatives in respect of the properties held by late Alamelu Ammal who died on 10/06/2011. She has executed a Will in respect of her properties. Based on the Will dated 29.01.2010, the 2nd respondent / defacto complainant claims right over the property of Alamelu Ammal. Whereas, the petitioner / accused based on the Will dated 21.06.2004 claiming right. Both the parties have filed petition to probate their respective Will. These petitions are converted into Testamentary Original Suits ( TOS) in view of the caveat. Thus, primarily the dispute is civil in nature. Parties have already approached the Civil Court for remedy. Beside for the same set of fact https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis & Crl.M.P.Nos.19055 of 2019 & 3177 of 2021 alleging that the accused had settled the property of the partnership firm namely Alamelu Industries in favour of his wife on 23.06.2014 as if the Alamelu Industries is his proprietary concern and the property belongs to him. In his private complaint he has specifically alleged that to usurp the property, the accused has fabricated an antedated document (Retirement Deed from the partnership firm dated 31.12.1993) by forging the signatures of Late Mrs. Alamelu Ammal, so as to falsely portray himself as the sole owner of the property. With these allegations, the private complaint in C.C. No.176 of 2015 is pending before the Trial Court.