Member of the housing cooperative Kotova

A member of the housing cooperative Kotova died in 2006, she lived in a one-room apartment, at the time of her death she paid 95 percent of the share contribution for the apartment. A member of this cooperative Kuznetsov applied for a vacated apartment. Kuznetsov at a general meeting of members of the cooperative said that he needed housing, since their family of six lives in a 2-room apartment (Kuznetsov himself, his wife, their son with his wife and two minor children). Kuznetsov believed that he had a pre-emptive right to provide him with this apartment. A member of the same cooperative Podrebernikova also filed an application for the provision of this apartment to her. She explained that she was a close friend of Kotova, provided financial assistance to her, and took care of her. Podrebernikova also provided a notarized testament to Kotova, according to which Kotova bequeathed a share to her, Podrebernikova. The general meeting of the cooperative decided to provide the vacated apartment to Kuznetsov on the grounds that Podrebernikova lives alone in a two-room apartment, her husband Podrebernikova died, her daughter lives with her family in another city. Podrebernikova herself fully paid the share fee for the apartment and is its owner. Thus, Podrebernikova housing is provided. Housing conditions of Kuznetsov are much worse, therefore, Kotova’s vacated apartment should be provided for use to him. As for the will of Kotova, then, according to the members of the cooperative, Podrebernikova bequeathed precisely the share that the housing cooperative will pay Kotova. Kotova appealed the decision of the general meeting of the cooperative to the court and demanded that Kotova’s apartment be provided for her use. Settle the dispute on the merits. What decision will the court make?