MOHAN LAL Vs. ISHWAR DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of two connected revision petitions, one bearing No. 6991 of 2011, filed by the petitioners against the order dated 3.11.2011, whereby the trial court dismissed the application for leading secondary evidence and another bearing No. 135 of 2012, filed by the petitioners against the order dated 22.12.2011 whereby the trial court closed their evidence by order. In the suit filed by Ishwar Devi and Kailash Rani plaintiffs-respondents No. 1 and 2 (herein referred as, 'the respondents No. 1 and 2') claim 1/4th share in the suit land measuring 229 kanals as fully detailed in the head note of the plaint, being the legal heirs of Chanan Dass son of Vasanda Ram and the mutation No. 1454 sanctioned on 13.6.1980 in respect of the aforesaid land in favour of the defendants No. 1 and 2 and Yashpal predecessor in interest of the defendants No. 3 to 6, on the basis of the alleged will dated 10.1.1979, is illegal. They had also challenged the transfer of the land bearing khasra No. 88/16 (8-0), 17/1 (7-12) by the defendants No. 1 land 2 and aforesaid Yashpal in favour of defendants No. 10 to 13 and also further transfer of the same in favour of defendants No. 14 to 16.

(2.) At the time when the case was fixed for defendant's evidence, the defendants No. 2, 5 and 7 moved an application for leading secondary evidence of the registered will on the grounds that the original will could not be traced as it was in possession of Yashpal son of Gian Chand, but he had died at very young age, therefore, the will could not be recovered. They also placed reliance on the judgment delivered in case Smt Sobha Rani and others v. Ravi Kumar and others, 1999 1 RCR(Civ) 98 in order to contend that secondary evidence could be produced. The relevant observations are reproduced as under:-

(3.) The plaintiffs respondents filed reply to the application stating that Chanan Dass did not execute any will and the alleged will is a forged document as such in order to conceal the forgery, the original will is not being produced. Chanan Dass used to fix his signatures in "landa" script, but copy of the will bears his thumb impression. In this regard reliance was placed on the judgment delivered in case Mukesh Kumar alias Motta v. State of Haryana, 2011 1 RCR(Civ) 675, Om Par hash and others v. Som Nath and another, 1999 2 PunLJ 54 and Jagta v. Ruldu and another, 1993 PunLJ 203,