R.Nagalakshmi (Deceased) 1.K.Vijayalakshmi and 2 others M/S.Waraon and Sai Rams, ,N.Ramakrishnan vs Mr.Chinthamani (Deceased) 1.Mr.C.Kothandaraman and 2 others — A/1299/2026
Case under Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 1. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 08th June 2026.
CNR: HCMA010284582026
Filing Number
A/21034/2026
Filing Date
04-02-2026
Registration No
A/1299/2026
Registration Date
11-03-2026
Judge
Honourable Dr.Justice A.D.MARIA CLETE
Coram
Honourable Dr.Justice A.D.MARIA CLETE
Bench Type
Single Bench
Judicial Branch
ORIGINALSECTION
Decision Date
08th June 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
R.Nagalakshmi (Deceased) 1.K.Vijayalakshmi and 2 others M/S.Waraon and Sai Rams, ,N.Ramakrishnan
Mr.R.Sarathi
Mrs.R.Ashwini
Respondent(s)
Mr.Chinthamani (Deceased) 1.Mr.C.Kothandaraman and 2 others
Mrs.P.Mohanalakshmi
Mrs.C.Mahalakshmi
Hearing History
Judge: Honourable Dr.Justice A.D.MARIA CLETE
APPLICATION IN CIVIL SUITS
APPLICATION IN CIVIL SUITS
APPLICATION IN CIVIL SUITS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | APPLICATION IN CIVIL SUITS |
| 04-06-2026 | APPLICATION IN CIVIL SUITS |
| 15-04-2026 | APPLICATION IN CIVIL SUITS |
Orders
Case Summary: A/1299/2026 Court Decision: The Madras High Court allowed both applications filed by the defendants in a will dispute case (T.O.S. No. 29 of 2016). The court authorized forensic examination of the disputed signature on a will dated 18.05.1992 and appointed an Advocate Commissioner to submit the original will and comparison documents to a Government Forensic Science Laboratory for handwriting expert analysis. Key Reasoning: Since the principal issue involves whether the will is genuine, and both parties raised signature authenticity questions during cross-examination, the court found expert handwriting comparison would assist effective adjudication. The respondents/plaintiffs did not object, and the court clarified the expert opinion would be merely evidentiary with its admissibility and weight to be determined at trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: A/1299/2026 Court Decision: The Madras High Court allowed both applications filed by the defendants in a will dispute case (T.O.S. No. 29 of 2016). The court authorized forensic examination of the disputed signature on a will dated 18.05.1992 and appointed an Advocate Commissioner to submit the original will and comparison documents to a Government Forensic Science Laboratory for handwriting expert analysis. Key Reasoning: Since the principal issue involves whether the will is genuine, and both parties raised signature authenticity questions during cross-examination, the court found expert handwriting comparison would assist effective adjudication. The respondents/plaintiffs did not object, and the court clarified the expert opinion would be merely evidentiary with its admissibility and weight to be determined at trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts