1987 and the admission of P.W1 in his cross examination that the fourth defendant was a cultivating tenant under the deceased first plaintiff, proceeded to dismiss the suit. That apart, the learned Judge observed that the plaintiff has not proved that the fourth defendant has been subsequently dispossessed from the suit property. The learned Judge also observed that the plaintiff has not able to prove his exclusive possession of the property. The learned Judge, taking note of a few discrepancies in the evidence of P.Ws 2 and 3, held that the plaintiff had not fully discharged the burden of proving the genuineness and authenticity of the Will-Ex.A10. Consequently, the suit came to be dismissed. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the plaintiff had filed appeal A.S.No.13 of 2017 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tiruvallur and had also filed an application in I.A.No. 1 of 2019 for receiving the additional documents. This application was dismissed by the learned Judge stating that if the documents are admitted, the plaintiff should be given a chance to cross
