PAWAN KUMAR DHINGRA Vs. USHA DHINGRA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the orders dated 21.12.2012 and 01.10.2014 (Annexure P-1 and P-2, respectively) passed by the trial Court. The suit was filed by the petitioner before the trial Court against his sisters claiming exclusive title to the property/house No. 80-B, Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana on the basis of Will dated 22.7.1982 allegedly executed by his father. According to learned counsel for the petitioner this was a registered Will. It was contended that the Will in question was scribed by a regular Deed Writer and there are two attesting witnesses to the Will. It was mentioned in the Will itself that one of the daughter, namely; Usha Dhigra-defendant/respondent No.1 was already married whereas defendant/respondent No. 2-Kamlesh Dhingra was unmarried and that if the testator himself is not able to get his second daughter married during his life time, it was the responsibility of the petitioner to get the marriage ceremonies performed and incur the whole expenses. In fact father of the petitioner solemnized the marriage of respondent No. 2 during his life time. Pal Singh father of the parties died on 31.7.1991 and on the basis of Will the petitioner became absolute owner.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submits that in the absence of the petitioner's ability to produce the essential witnesses to the Will, that will cause a serious damage to his rights. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to various interim orders passed by the trial Court. The issues were framed from the pleadings of the parties on 26.7.2010 and the case was adjourned for various dates for evidence of the petitioner. The petitioner himself appeared in the witness-box but despite so many adjournments granted, the evidence could not be led and that resulted into closure of evidence of the petitioner vide order dated 21.12.2012 (Annexure P-1) which is reproduced as under:-

(3.) The petitioner made a challenge to the order of closure of evidence by filing Civil Revision No. 6115 of 2014 but that petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 10.09.2014, with liberty to the petitioner to avail of the remedy before the trial Court. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an application dated 26.9.2014 (Annexure P-4) for granting last opportunity to the petitioner to examine the material witnesses to the Will dated 22.7.1982. That application was dismissed by the trial Court vide the impugned order dated 1.10.2014 (Annexure P-2) after seeking reply from the respondents.