SURJIT SINGH Vs. JAGTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision has been referred to D. B. in view of the divergent views expressed in some single Bench decisions of this Court on the inter- pretation of Order 18, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "CPC". A number of Civil Revisions i.e. CR No. 92 of 2004, 59, 1813, 2992, 3066 of 2005, 286, 287 and 2970 of 2006 have been admitted to be heard along with this CR No. 1213 of 2005. This order will dispose of all the aforesaid Civil Revisions as the law points involved in all the aforesaid Civil Re- visions are identical.

(2.) We have to consider the scope and ambit of the right of the plaintiff to lead evidence in rebuttal, on issues the onus of proof of which is on the plaintiff.

(3.) We reproduce the entire reference in order to obviate the repetition of the salient facts which are necessary for the adjudication of the reference, as under : "Hemant Gupta. J. The defendants are in revision petition aggrieved against the order passed by the learned trial Court permitting the plaintiffs to lead expert evidence in rebuttal. The dispute in the suit relates to the estate of Kabal Singh who died on 13-6-1997. His daughter Jaspreet Kaur sold her 1/4th share in the land measuring 111 kanals 7 marlas vide sale deed dated 10-10-1997. The said sale was challenged by the plaintiffs on the basis of Will dated 6-4-1997, allegedly, executed by Kabal Singh in favour of his three sons i.e. the plaintiffs excluding his daughter i.e. defendant No. 4. The trial Court has framed the following issues :