The alleged deed executed was though a registered document was not of free will as it provided that Smt. Chandramma was transferring only life interest. More so, the document contained large number of properties including eleven houses which had never been a subject matter of the Will dated 2.1.1956. The document on record i.e. the Will dated 2.1.1956 had never been admitted as required under the law.
Therefore, no fault can be found with the judgment impugned given by the High Court. Such a document cannot be taken on record. The said document had been examined and it made it clear that the said document did not create only the life interest for Smt. Chandramma, rather it created equal rights for both the beneficiaries. More so, once the freehold rights had been acquired in the said property at a subsequent stage by the beneficiaries, Smt. Chandramma had a right to deal with half share of the said property in any manner she liked. The case do not warrant review of the impugned judgment.