- (1.) The petitioners have preferred this writ petition, claiming the following reliefs: "a) By appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned order dated 20.09.2017 (Annexure-7) passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bali (Camp. Desuri) may kindly be quashed and set aside and the application filed by the defendant-petitioners under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) may kindly be allowed. b) Any other order or direction which the Hon'ble Court feels appropriate in favour of the petitioners in light of justice, equity and good conscience may also be passed. c) Cost of the petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioners."
(2.) The respondent-plaintiff had filed a suit for partition and injunction against the petitioners, the partition suit was filed against the real brother, sisters as well as against the father of the respondent-plaintiff. The bone of contention was whether the property was joint property, ancestral property or self acquired property. The respondent-plaintiff claimed the share in the property on the basis of the same being ancestral property. The petitioners-defendants filed a written statement that the property is self acquired and thus, cannot be partitioned as a joint property.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners states that after the death of father, they have come to know about the will which was in existence in their favour and if the property is declared as self acquired then, the will could be of vital importance for adjudication of the suit. The petitioners-defendants therefore, preferred an application under Order 8 Rule 1 A(3) of CPC which was rejected by the learned court below on the ground that if at all there was a will then the same should have been brought on record by father of the petitioners-defendants late Mr. Champa Lal.;