MUNNA LAL Vs. SADHU RAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendants revision petition challenging the order dated 31.1.2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narnaul, whereby application for leading additional evidence filed by respondent/plaintiff Nos. 1 to 3 has been allowed.

(2.) AS per the averments made in this revision petition, plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration regarding the suit land on the basis of a registere'd Will dated 9.12.1988 (Ex.P1) allegedly executed by Jhutha Ram in favour of the plaintiffs and claimed title over the properties left by him. The aforesaid Will was scribed by Roshan Lal and was witnessed by Krishan Sanghi, Lambardar and Kurda Ram and was registered by Banwari Lal, the then Sub Registrar.

(3.) ON 7.12.2004, PW10 was examined. No further evidence of the plaintiff was present. Learned Counsel for the plaintiff made his statement that he has closed his evidence except the handwriting expert and also filed an application for adjournment on the ground that Mr. Vijay Kumar Rastogi Handwriting Expert had gone to Bombay all of a sudden and for that reason could not be examined. Plaintiffs were granted last opportunity to examine handwriting expert at his own responsibility on 20.12.2004 failing which evidence of the plaintiff was to be deemed to have been closed. On 3.01.2005, instead of Vijay Rastogi, the plaintiff produced Shri Shamsher Singh Malik, handwriting and finger print expert. Still the counsel for the plaintiff made a statement that he has to produce voter list of Ward No. 6 as well as certified copy of house tax register and closed his remaining evidence. The case was adjourned to 29.1.2005 for the evidence of the petitioner/defendant reserving the right of the plaintiff to produce the aforesaid document stating that if the plaintiff failed to produce the document on the date fixed, in that event the documentary evidence of the plaintiff shall be treated as closed.