- (1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition claiming the following reliefs: "1. That the impugned order dated 03.04.2017 (Annex-10) passed by learned Additional District Court No.4, Udaipur in (2 of 5) [CW-5540/2017] Civil Original 389/2012 allowing the application under Section 137 and 138 of the Indian Evidence Act, may kindly be quashed and set aside. 2. Any other appropriate order which this Hon'ble Court consider just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case, may kindly be passed in favour of the appellant."
(2.) The petitioner filed a civil suit No.389/2012 before the learned District Court, Udaipur for partition of property and permanent injunction against the non-petitioners.
(3.) The bone of contention in the matter is that during pending of the suit, the respondents opposed partition on count of a Will in their favour. The petitioner objected the veracity of the said Will. DW-4 Anandi Lal, during his cross examination, has deposed that at the time when he attested the Will, the signature of testator, Laxmi Lal was not there. The defendant-respondent filed an application under Sections 137 and 138 of the Indian Evidence Act for re-examination of DW-4 Anandi Lal claiming that on a conjoint reading of examination and cross examination, it is clear DW-4 Anandi Lal wanted to depose that the signatures of testator were made in front of him. The said application was allowed vide the impugned order passed by the learned court below.;