ASHOK KINGER Vs. PRADEEP KINGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revisional Application is directed against the order dated 15.09.2017 passed by the Ld. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chandigarh, in Civil Suit No.1219 of 2015.

(2.) Vide the impugned order, the Ld. Court below had allowed an Application filed by the Respondent/Defendant No.1 under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act to adduce secondary evidence in order to prove the Will dated 8.1.2006, claimed to have been executed by his father Shri Hardayal Kinger (since deceased), who was also father of the Petitioner/Plaintiff. The grounds on which such secondary evidence was sought to be led have been noted by the Ld. Court below as follows -

(3.) The Application was vehemently resisted on behalf of Petitioner/Plaintiff, who took a categorical stand that the disputed Will in question was never actually executed as claimed by the Respondents. Rather, the photostat document sought to be tendered as secondary evidence was actually a forged and fabricated document, in which, somehow the signature of deceased Hardayal Kinger had visibly been superimposed on an artificially typed document, and the actual document from which the present photostat copy is said to have been prepared was intentionally concealed by the Respondents, since perusal of the same would immediately go to show that it is a falsely created document manufactured only for the purpose of contesting the proceedings between the parties. Further, the Petitioner categorically denied that he had ever seen the original of the disputed Will, much less taken away the same with him as claimed by the Respondents. In addition, authenticity as well as admissibility of the disputed document has been assailed by drawing the attention of the Court to several other circumstances existing n the present case, to which reference will be made subsequently in this order.