JUDGMENT

B. P. DAS, J. — This revision application has bee filed chal¬lenging the order dated 4.5.1999 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri, in T.S.No. 127 of 1999 rejecting the petitioners’ prayer to send the signatures of the testator on the Will to a hand-writing expert for examination.

2. As it appears from the statement of facts made by the petitioners, Binayak Mishra, O.P.No. 1 herein, instituted a pro¬ceeding under Sec. 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (here¬inafter called ‘the Act’) before the District Judge, Puri, for grant of Letters of Administration in respect of the properties covered by the Will so executed by his late father Gangadhar Mishra, on 22.8.1973. In the aforesaid proceeding, Satyanarayan Mishra, the present pro forma O.P. No. 2, was added as O.P.No. 1, and the present petitioners as O.P. Nos. 2 to 4. Said Binayak Mishra filed the aforesaid application for grant of Letters of Administration stating therein that Late Gangadhar Mishra, the father of the present O.P. Nos. 1 and 2, executed a Will on 22.8.1973 in presence of witnesses, which was duly registered by the District Sub-Registrar, Puri, on the same day, Gangadhar died on the next day i.e., 23.8.1973. It is worthwhile to mention here that by virtue of the aforesaid Will, Gangadhar has bequeathed all his movable and immovable properties in favour of his two sons - Binayak and Satyanarayan, the present O.Ps.1 Apart from the two sons, Gangadhar had a daughter, namely, Padmabati, who died shortly after the death of her father. The present petitioners are respectively the husband and the two sons of Padmabati. In the Court below, the present pro forma O.P. No. 2 filed his writ¬ten statement stating therein that he had no knowledge about the Will of which the present O.P. No. 1 sought for grant of Letters of Administration till he received the notice of the misc. case arising out of the said proceeding. The present O.P. No. 2 further stated that he had filed a suit for partition being T.S.No. 130 of 1995 and the same was pending between the parties in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri, in respect of the joint family properties. The present petitioners, who were O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 in the proceeding before the District Judge, filed their written statement stating therein that the Will was ob¬tained by practising fraud; that the present O.P. No. 1 being an advocate had obtained a fraudulent, ante-dated and spurious deed in his support; and that the present O.Ps. have colluded with each other in order to deceive their sister-Padmabati of her legiti¬mate share in the joint family properties. The stand of the present petitioners was that Gangadhar was seriously ill and had lost his mental balance much before his death and that the execu¬tion of the Will on 22.8.1973, i.e., one day prior to the death of Gangadhar, cast a shadow of doubt in the minds of other par¬ties about the genuineness of the Will. The sum and substance of their stand was that the Will had been created with the sale motive to grab the properties and that the testator had no knowledge about the alleged Will. That apart, when the pro forma O.P. No. 2 has already instituted a suit for partition wherein those petitioners were impleaded as defendants on the basis of an application made by them in that respect, the proceeding under Sec. 276 of the Act has been initiated with the sole motive and intention to deprive the legal heirs of the daughter of Gangadhar from any share in the properties. In order to bring home their allegations, the present petitioners filed an application in the probate proceeding praying therein to send the signatures of the testator appearing on the Will to a hand-writing expert for examination since the signatures and the thumb impressions of the testator on the Will are forged. The further case of the present petitioners is that they also undertook to produce certain deeds containing the admitted signatures of the testator for compari