ANUPAMA Vs. BHALCHANDRA ONKAR PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of both the sides the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) By way of this petition the petitioners who are the original defendants are impugning two orders passed by the Trial Court on application (Exh. 48) allowing the application preferred by the respondents/plaintiffs calling upon the petitioners to produce the will of deceased Ranjit being propounded by the petitioners and regarding which the respondents have been seeking a declaration of it being void. The petitioners are also impugning the order passed on the application of respondents (Exhibit 53) preferred under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking amendment of pleadings.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Brahme for the petitioners submits that the respondents who happen to be the parents of the deceased Ranjit have filed this suit claiming right and share in the suit properties and seeking declaration that the will being propounded by the petitioners is void. He submits that in fact it is the other son of the respondents who has staged this litigation and is acting behind the curtains. He has criminal antecedents and if the original will is produced on the record there is every possibility of it being tampered with. He therefore submits that the direction to produce the original will passed by the impugned order does not take care of all these facts and circumstances and the order is illegal.