MOHINDER SINGH Vs. SMT. PREETO DEVI & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No. 1 in the trial Count has assailed order dated 16.8.2017 Annexure P-7(colly) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Indora in two applications i.e. one under Section 72 of the Indian Evidence Act and another under Sections 45 and 47 of the said Act.

(2.) The facts as disclosed from the record in a nutshell are that respondents No. 1 to 3 (plaintiffs in the trial Court) have filed the suit for seeking declaration that they are owners in possession of the suit land and the unregistered "Will" dated 20.11.2007 being forged and fictitious document is null and void hence not binding on them. The pleadings in the suit are complete. The same is at the stage of recording rebuttal evidence for which as per record was previously fixed for 15.9.2017. The plaintiffs have moved two applications with a prayer to sent the disputed thumb impression of executant Veeru on the Will to hand writing expert for comparison with his thumb impression on an affidavit allegedly executed by deceased Veeru and with his thumb impression on the order of mutation No. 1037 dated 20.10.2004.

(3.) Learned trial Court on having taken into consideration the pleadings of the parties has concluded that the so called affidavit executed by Veeru is not coming from proper custody i.e. the record maintained in the revenue department. However, the order of mutation being attested copy was found to be a genuine document and relevant for comparison of thumb impression of deceased Veeru on the disputed Will. Consequently, the prayer made by the plaintiffs has been accordingly allowed and a Commission appointed for onwards transmission of the Will and order of mutation to hand writing expert for comparison and filing of report on 15.9.2017 vide order under challenge in this petition. The suit was also adjourned for recording evidence in rebuttal on the same day.