CR No.4812 o”

1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.4812 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: November 16, 2012 Suman Lata Pathak ...Petitioner Versus Raj Kamal Pathak ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Ashok Sharma Nabhewala, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Sanjay Gupta, Advocate, for respondents No.1.

Mr.KS Manrat, Advocate, for respondent No.5.

A.N.JINDAL, J.

(Oral) The order dated 23.4.2011, refusing the defendant's application for leading additional on the question of Will is under challenge.

Heard.

The arguments reveal that the defendant/petitioner Suman Lata Pathak had set up a Will dated 26.8.1976 allegedly executed by Ved Parkash Pathak, retired major from the Indian Army, in favour of Pushpa Pathak, who died on 11.9.2002 i.e.subsequent to the filing of the suit.

The main controveRs.in the suit is with regard to the Will but no issue was framed in this regard.

Had there been a specific issue regarding Will then the defendant could lead evidence over the same.

Petitioner's counsel asserts that he had already moved an application for framing of issue with regard to the will dated 26.8.1976, but the same has also not been decided so far.

CR No.4812 o”

2. In any case, once the defendant has set up the Will propounded to have been executed by Ved Parkash Pathak, notwithstanding the fact that the parties have already led evidence, the obligation of the court commanded for framing a specific issue qua the Will.

The petitioner/defendant does not want to lead further evidence on the Will except for examining an expert.

In view of the above, the impugned order needs to be reversed.

Resultantly, this petition is accepted, impugned order is set aside and the trial court is directed to decide the application moved by the petitioner (Annexure P/6) for framing additional issue and then to proceed in accordance with law.

November 16, 2012 (A.N.JINDAL) prem JUDGE