The High Court dismissed a revision petition challenging an order allowing the plaintiff to lead evidence in rebuttal concerning a Will. The court held the plaintiff had the right to rebut evidence led by defendants on a recast issue.
Revision petition dismissed as it lacked merit since the plaintiff had the right to lead rebuttal evidence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
-.-
-.-
Usha Rani
...Petitioner
Versus
Kamal Nain and others.
...Respondent
-.-
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
-.-
Present:Mr. H.S.Dhandi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Advocate ,for the respondents.
-.-
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (Oral)
This revision petition is directed against the order dated 21.5.2010 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Mohali, by which an application filed by the defendants under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short `CPC') for striking off the evidence produced by the plaintiff in rebuttal, was dismissed on the ground that he has led the evidence with regard to the Will dated 27.11.1998 which does not form part of the plaint.
Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the plaintiff cannot be allowed to lead evidence in respect to a plea which is not taken in the pleadings. Counsel for the respondents, however, submits that during the pendency of the suit the Will was relied upon by the defendants on the basis of which an issue was recasted and the burden was laid on the defendants to prove the said issue. After the defendants had led their evidence in affirmative, the plaintiff led his evidence in rebuttal. The
CR NO. 5022 of 2010 - 2 -
defendants now want the evidence led in rebuttal by the plaintiff to be struck off from the record.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it appropriate to disturb the order passed by the learned trial Court as the plaintiff has all the right to lead evidence in rebuttal on the issue, which is to be proved by the defendants.
In view of the above, this revision petition has no merit and the
same is hereby dismissed.
(Rakesh Kumar Jain) (Judge)
December 10, 2010 Saini
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the plaintiff can be allowed to lead evidence in rebuttal regarding a Will not originally part of the plaint.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Usha Rani
Kamal Nain
Rakesh Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
