Arun Bhansali, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 24.08.2015 passed by the trial court, whereby while deciding the application filed by the respondent under Section 136 of the Evidence Act, the trial court has directed that the petitioner would be free to lead evidence qua permanent injunction and that it would not be relevant to lead evidence qua the Will.

3. The petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction, inter alia, based on title which he claims to have derived by way of a Will. The suit was resisted by the respondents-defendants by questioning the legality and validity of the Will. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed four issues.

4. The first issue pertains to whether the petitioner was the sole-owner of the property and is in a possession and whether the defendants have interfered with the same which has resulted in cause of action; second issue pertains to maintainability of the suit under Section 41(h) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and the third issue pertains to whether the suit was bad for non-joinder of the parties.

5. The petitioner filed