Rekha Mittal, J. - (1.) Nisha Rani, daughter of Raj Kumar (since deceased) impleaded as one of legal representatives of Raj Kumar has challenged the order dated 23.05.2016 (Annexure P-9) passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Talwandi Sabo to the extent that she is not permitted to prove Will despite having been provided with an opportunity to adduce evidence while disposing of application (Annexure P-3).
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner would contend that Bharat Bansal - respondent No.1 has filed a suit for recovery against Sh. Subhash Chander and others including Raj Kumar - defendant No.5 now represented by his LRs Smt. Saroj Rani and others including the present petitioner. The petitioner was not permitted to adduce evidence and an application (Annexure P-3) was filed for permitting her to adduce evidence wherein it has been alleged in para 4 that the petitioner has not inherited property of deceased - Raj Kumar, as Raj Kumar executed a Will in favour of Smt. Saroj Rani his wife, therefore, she has no liability to discharge, outstanding against Sh. Raj Kumar. It has further been argued that as the petitioner has been given an opportunity to adduce evidence, the trial Court, at this stage of the proceedings, was not competent to decide as to what evidence can be adduced by the petitioner. In addition, it is submitted that even if some evidence is adduced by a party that is beyond pleadings, the said fact has to be considered at the time of final disposal of the suit on merits. Another submission made by counsel is that no prejudice would be caused to the respondent/plaintiff or co-defendants of the petitioner in case she is permitted to adduce evidence even in regard to the Will executed by deceased - Raj Kumar. It is argued that adducing of evidence by the petitioner qua inheritance to the estate of Sh. Raj Kumar is necessary for complete and effective adjudication of the matter in controversy as to who amongst the LRs of Raj Kumar is liable to discharge any liability fastened against the deceased. The last submission made by counsel is that the mere fact that no such Will finds reference in the written statement filed by the petitioner cannot be allowed to stand in the way of the petitioner to adduce relevant evidence including evidence to prove the Will left behind by the deceased. In support of his contention, he has referred to a judgment of this Court "Jasmail Kaur and others v. Jagmohan Singh and others ", CR No.414 of 2012 decided on 26.11.2014.
(3.) I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper-book particularly the various annexures appended with the petition.;