AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 263 wordsSat Pal, J.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the impugned order dated 4.8.1997 passed by the learned Civil Judge (JD) Dasua. I, however, do not find any infirmity or illegality in the well reasoned order passed by the learned trial Court. It is not disputed that the plaintiff/petitioner in the plaint has clearly pleaded that Late Smt. Kartar Kaur had executed last will in favour of the plaintiff and on the basis of those pleadings an issue was framed to the following effect :
"Whether the deceased Kartar Kaur executed her last and valid will in favour of the plaintiff, if so to what effect ? OPP"
Later on the plaintiff amended the pleadings and incorporated an additional fact that the will mentioned in the plaint was executed on 20.5.1987. Accordingly, issue No. 2 was amended which reads as under :
"Whether Smt. Kartar Kaur widow of Khera Singh had executed a legal and valid will dated 20.5.1987 in favour of the plaintiff, if so to what effect ? OPP"
Counsel for the petitioner submits that since issue No. 2 has been amended, the petitioner/plaintiff should have been given opportunity to examine additional evidence to prove the said will. As stated herein above, the plaintiff in the plaint has clearly pleaded that Smt. Kartar Kaur had executed a legal and valid will in favour of the plaintiff and simply by incorporating the date of the will, petitioner cannot be permitted to examine additional evidence at this belated stage. Accordingly the petition is dismissed.