Full Text
Translation output
$-36 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CM(M)540/2017&CM APPL.18247-18248/2017
PRATIBHA & ANR ..... Petitioner . . Through: Mr.RK Sharma,Adv.
CM(M)540/2017&CM APPL.18247-18248/2017
PRATIBHA & ANR ..... Petitioner . . Through: Mr.RK Sharma,Adv.
VERSUS
STATE & ORS Respondent
Through: None.
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
26.07.2018 As per record, the respondent nos. I fe 4 are indicated to have put in appearance during the course ofproceedings on i.e.T2.12.2017 there was representation on behalf of the respondent no.1 and the, respondent no.4 is indicated to have been represented on the date
11.07.2017.In terms ofdirections dated 15.05.2017 ofthis Court,the other respondents have also been served as .per proceedings dated
11.07.2017 of the Joint - Registrar (Judicial), there was no representation on behalf ofthe respondents as observed hereinabove for the date.
Submissions have been made,on behalfofthe petitioner by the learned counsel forThe petitioner as averred in the present petition assailing the impugned orders dated 17.03.2017 and 24.04.2017 in PC
No.37/09 ofthe learned trial Court ofthe ADJ-02(West)inasmuch as vide order dated 17.03.2017,the grant ofa further opportunity to the
CM(M)540/2017 pageno.lofS
2018:DHC:9310 petitioner for leading petitioners' evidence was closed observing to the effect that seven years had already been granted to the petitioner to complete the evidence and no further opportunity could he granted to the petitioner as reflected vide the proceedings ofthe,previous date.
Vide the other impugned order dated 24.04.2017 ofthe learned trial
Court,the application under Section 151 ofthe CPC filed on behalfof the petitioner seeking to lead-the petitioners' evidence closed vide order dated 17.03.2017 was also declined. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there have been regular changes of
DSLSA counsel inasmuch as the petitioners could not get appropriate assistance.
A perusal of the impugned order dated 24.04.2017 inter alia indicates vide para-10 ofthe said order it had been observed that the petitioner had not disclosed the name ofthe witness,who would prove the signatures,ofthe deceased Shri Omkar Bahadur Parti inasmuch as the petitioner had sought to prove the will of the deceased in the
Probate Petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the will, copy of which is placed on the record itself indicating the name ofthe other witness Shri Siya Ram Kapoor is one ofthe attesting witness to the will ofthe deceased submitting to the effect that the witness Shri Ashok Vij had already been examined.
Taking into account the faetum that the will is apparently already-on the record ofthe learned trial Court inasmuch as the true copy ofthe same is on the record of this Court, the name of the other attesting witness is apparently before the learned trial Court,in these
CM(M)540/2017 pageno.2or3 circumstances, one single opportunity is granted to the petitioners to produce the witness Siya Ram Kapoor in support of the^avennents made in the petition on a date to be fixed on 30.07.2018 by the trial
Court.The impugned orders are modified accordingly.
The petition CM(M)540/2017is disposed ofaccordingly.
Copy ofthis or'Ser be sentto the learned trial Court.
Copy ofthe order be given Dasti,as prayed.
ANU MALHOTRA,J JULY 26,2018 vm
26.07.2018 As per record, the respondent nos. I fe 4 are indicated to have put in appearance during the course ofproceedings on i.e.T2.12.2017 there was representation on behalf of the respondent no.1 and the, respondent no.4 is indicated to have been represented on the date
11.07.2017.In terms ofdirections dated 15.05.2017 ofthis Court,the other respondents have also been served as .per proceedings dated
11.07.2017 of the Joint - Registrar (Judicial), there was no representation on behalf ofthe respondents as observed hereinabove for the date.
Submissions have been made,on behalfofthe petitioner by the learned counsel forThe petitioner as averred in the present petition assailing the impugned orders dated 17.03.2017 and 24.04.2017 in PC
No.37/09 ofthe learned trial Court ofthe ADJ-02(West)inasmuch as vide order dated 17.03.2017,the grant ofa further opportunity to the
CM(M)540/2017 pageno.lofS
2018:DHC:9310 petitioner for leading petitioners' evidence was closed observing to the effect that seven years had already been granted to the petitioner to complete the evidence and no further opportunity could he granted to the petitioner as reflected vide the proceedings ofthe,previous date.
Vide the other impugned order dated 24.04.2017 ofthe learned trial
Court,the application under Section 151 ofthe CPC filed on behalfof the petitioner seeking to lead-the petitioners' evidence closed vide order dated 17.03.2017 was also declined. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there have been regular changes of
DSLSA counsel inasmuch as the petitioners could not get appropriate assistance.
A perusal of the impugned order dated 24.04.2017 inter alia indicates vide para-10 ofthe said order it had been observed that the petitioner had not disclosed the name ofthe witness,who would prove the signatures,ofthe deceased Shri Omkar Bahadur Parti inasmuch as the petitioner had sought to prove the will of the deceased in the
Probate Petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the will, copy of which is placed on the record itself indicating the name ofthe other witness Shri Siya Ram Kapoor is one ofthe attesting witness to the will ofthe deceased submitting to the effect that the witness Shri Ashok Vij had already been examined.
Taking into account the faetum that the will is apparently already-on the record ofthe learned trial Court inasmuch as the true copy ofthe same is on the record of this Court, the name of the other attesting witness is apparently before the learned trial Court,in these
CM(M)540/2017 pageno.2or3 circumstances, one single opportunity is granted to the petitioners to produce the witness Siya Ram Kapoor in support of the^avennents made in the petition on a date to be fixed on 30.07.2018 by the trial
Court.The impugned orders are modified accordingly.
The petition CM(M)540/2017is disposed ofaccordingly.
Copy ofthis or'Ser be sentto the learned trial Court.
Copy ofthe order be given Dasti,as prayed.
ANU MALHOTRA,J JULY 26,2018 vm
CM(M)540/2017 ' pageno.3of3
JUDGMENT