In CR 3288/2018-PUNJ HC- Will in question is registered document and no direction is required for placing same on record, holds P&H HC
Justice Nidhi Gupta [23-03-2023]

Read Order: YUDHVEER AND OTHER VS. PUNEET KUMAR

Mansimran Kaur

Chandigarh, April, 7, 2023:  The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a revision petition instituted by the plaintiffs for setting aside of the order whereby the application filed by them under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Sections 94 and 151 of Civil Procedure Code for directing the respondent/defendant to bring the original Will was dismissed by the Additional Civil Judge. 

Justice Nidhi Gupta observed that perusal of the present application under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Section 94 and 151 CPC filed by the petitioners for directing the respondent/defendant to bring on record the original Will   showed  that prayer in the said application stated that the defendant may kindly be directed to bring original Will dated January 5, 2001  and place it on Court file in the interest of justice. 

It was  submitted by the Counsel for the petitioners that petitioners were  claiming ownership over the suit property by way of inheritance whereas the respondent/defendant was  claiming inheritance over the suit property by way of alleged Will dated January 5, 2001.

Accordingly, the petitioners had filed the present Civil suit for declaration with the prayer that the alleged Will  as presented by the respondent/ defendant WAS  null and void being a result of forgery and fabrication, and the same was  thus, not binding on the petitioners/ plaintiff.

However, as the said Will was in the possession of the respondent, the petitioners had filed the present application under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Sections 94 and 151 CPC, for directing the respondent to place on record the original Will. It was further  submitted that it was  imperative that the respondent be directed to bring on record the original will to enable the petitioners to compare alleged handwriting of the testator on the said Will with the admitted signatures/thumb impression of the alleged testator. However,  the Trial Court dismissed the said application vide impugned order on the same day itself. 

After considering the rival contentions from both the sides, the Court noted that perusal  of the record of the case revealed  that the petitioners had filed the instant suit for declaration to the effect that they were owners in possession over the suit property, and registered Will was null and void being a result of forgery and fabrication. The said suit was filed  to which the respondent filed a written statement. 

Subsequently, the Petitioners filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint, which was allowed, and to which the respondent duly filed amended plaint.

Perusal of the present application under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Section 94 and 151 CPC filed by the petitioners for directing the respondent/defendant to bring on record the original Will dated showed that prayer in the said application was that “it is therefore, prayed that the defendant may kindly be directed to bring original Will dated January 5, 2001 and place it on Court file in the interest of justice”. 

It was categorically stated by the Counsel for the respondent that respondent will produce original Will at the time of his evidence. 

“Moreover, the Will in question is a registered document and no direction is required for placing the same on record”, the Court further remarked. 

As regards the contention of the Counsel for the petitioners that for proving the handwriting of testator it is necessary to produce the original Will, perusal of the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC shows that no such prayer was made therein, the Court noted.   

Accordingly, finding no merit in this revision petition, the Bench dismissed the same.