SIDDHARTHA MUKHERJEE Vs. JYOTIKONA BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred against the grant of probate in respect of a Will in favour of the respondent.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant assails the impugned judgment granting probate primarily on the ground that the issues in the testamentary suit were framed subsequent to the evidence being led by both the parties, whereafter an application filed by the propounder/respondent for adoption of the propounder s witnesses evidence was allowed. Even thereafter, when the present appellant, who disputed the grant of probate, made an application for cross-examination of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 on recall, on the ground that the adoption of evidence of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 tantamounted to adduction of fresh evidence, entitling the present appellant to further cross-examine such witnesses, the learned Trial Judge refused to grant the same.

(3.) It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that in the event a party is permitted to adopt its witnesses evidence, it tantamounts to adduction of fresh evidence. The effect of such fresh evidence would be that the earlier evidence adduced by the self-same witnesses gets nullified, thereby reopening an opportunity to the other side to cross-examine the witnesses on the freshly adduced evidence.