1. - Heard.The respondent no. 1 filed probate application before the court of District Judge, Bikaner in 1987. The petitioner no. I is the younger brother petitioner no. 2 is the mother and petitioner no. 3 is the sister of the respondent no. 1. On behalf of the present petitioners, the application was moved before the learned District Judge for producing 'Patta". The said application was rejected by the learned Judge only on the ground of delay as he was of the opinion that though, the petitioners were in possession of that "Patta" since 1987, they have produced very late. Apart from that, there is no affidavit in support of the delayed production of that "Patta", nor any explanation was given for the late production. Therefore, the learned Judge was of the opinion that no permission to produce the "Patta" can be granted to them at the very late stage.

2. The learned Judge was not justified in rejecting that application for production of "Patta" on the ground of delay only. It was submitted by Mr. Trivedi that "Patta" which was sought to be produced by the petitioners has no relevance and no application. Be that as it may. If it has no relevance, it will not help the petit