K.S. CHAUDHARI, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the order dated 12.08.2008 passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Ajmer by which he rejected the application of the plaintiff-petitioners under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Section 151 C.P.C.
(2.) THE plaintiff-petitioners filed suit for partition alleging that will dated 16.10.2001 is forged one as Rameshwar Lal was not able to see, listen, read and understand on that day. The defendant-respondents claimed properties on account of aforesaid will. Both the parties led evidence and during rebuttal evidence by the plaintiff, plaintiff moved an application under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Section 151 CPC and submitted that Rameshwar Lal was incapacitated in signing in 1994 and he used to operate his bank account by thumb impression and this fact came to plaintiffs knowledge in May 2008 and lateron he obtained documents from the bank which may be taken on record and he may be permitted to prove these documents. In reply to this application Defendant No.1 submitted that plaintiff should have led his evidence before rebuttal evidence and further stated that Rameshwar Lal used to sign till his death and further submitted that upto year 2001 he signed many documents as mentioned in para 9 of the reply. The learned trial Court after hearing both the parties rejected application.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that these documents are most relevant in deciding issue relating to genuineness of will and the learned trial Court has committed error in rejection application. Hence, the writ petition may be accepted and application may be allowed and documents may be taken on record, whereas the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that order passed by the learned trial Court is in accordance with law and further submitted that Article 227 of the Constitution does not confer power to correct error apparent on the face of the record or error of law and this Court cannot act as Court of appeal. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed. Issue No.5 has been framed by the trial Court which reads as under:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... ;