- (1.) Heard Sri Adnan Ahmad, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for opposite parties No. 1 and 2 and Sri Ravindra Pratap Singh, learned Counsel for the private opposite parties.
(2.) By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the orders dated 22.12.2009 and 24.3.2009 passed by the opposite parties No. 1 and 2, as contained in Annexure Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, to the writ petition. It has also prayed that opposite parties may be directed to allow the petitioner's application and summon the original Will dated 27.11.1976 from the Court of Consolidation Officer, Nawabganj, District Barabanki and also permit him to produce the expert opinion as mentioned in the application.
(3.) Sri Adnan Ahmad, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that Smt. Surendra Kumari filed a suit, which was numbered as Regular Suit No. 186 of 1982, for mandatory injunction against the petitioner on 8.9.1982 with regards to a house situate at village Barethi. Notice was issued and in response thereof, defendant/petitioner appeared and filed a detailed written statement on 31.9.1983, annexing therewith a certified copy of a Will dated 27.11.1976. On 3.2.1989, defendant/petitioner had filed an additional written statement on 3.2.1989. Thereafter, the suit proceeded and on 14.10.1993, the defendant/petitioner filed two documents before the trial Court; one was the original Will deed dated 27.11.1976 and the other document was a copy of the parivar register dated 20.1.1979. On 22.3.1997, the said suit was decreed ex parte against the petitioner. He further submits that an objection under Section 9 of Consolidation of Holdings Act was filed before the Consolidation Court between the same parties, who are in the regular suit No. 186 of 1982. Thereafter, on 25.5.1995, the petitioner withdrew the Original Will deed dated 27.11.1976 from the Civil Court and filed the same before the Consolidation Court. Subsequently, an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 22.3.1997, which was allowed and the suit was restored to its original number. On 22.1.2009, the petitioner moved an application for filing of certified copies of the statement of witnesses of the Will dated 27.11.1976, which were recorded in mutation proceeding and the same was also allowed.;