Learned counsel for the appellant contended that Mr. Sukhdev Singh Randhawa, Advocate another witness of the Will gave affidavit Ex. P19 affirming that the Will was never executed before him. However, Sukhdev Singh Randhawa has not been examined as witness by the plaintiff and consequently, his affidavit Ex. P19 cannot be used as evidence against the defendants who had no opportunity to cross-examine him regarding the contents of his affidavit. In fact, the said affidavit also appears not to have been proved. One Clerk of Advocate appeared as witness. He stated that he was working as Clerk with Mr. BS Bath, Advocate since deceased. The Clerk further stated that Mr. BS Bath had identified deponent Sukhdev Singh Randhawa on the affidavit. Thus, the Clerk witness simply proved identification of deponent Sukhdev Singh Randhawa by B.S. Bath on the affidavit. However, the Oath Commissioner who attested the said affidavit has not been examined as witness nor there is any other evidence to depict that the said affidavit was affirmed by Sukhdev Singh Randhawa, Advocate. In any event, even if the said affidavit is proved to have been affirmed by the said deponent, it cannot be read in evidence because the deponent did not appear as witness to afford opportunity of cross-examination to the defendants to test the veracity of the contents of the affidavit.
