Mr. K. Kannan, J.: (Oral) - The revision petition is against the order passed by the Appellate Court. While disposing of an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, it has directed for the additional evidence to be given and since it was of the view that there had been a wrong issue framed by the trial Court, it has directed the parties for staying focussed to what was relevant, directed evidence to be taken and submit the report afresh to the Appellate Court.

2. The plaintiff is aggrieved against this order on a plea that the parties knew what they were contending for. Although the Court framed an issue of whether the plaintiff was correct in contending that the Will was forged instead of framing the correct issue of whether the Will as propounded by the defendant was genuine, the parties knew that the defendant alone had to prove the genuineness of the Will. The defendant failed to avail to himself the opportunity of producing evidence in that he had stated even in the written statement that Section 71 of the Evidence Act made possible proof of Will if witnesses could not be produced and he was literally giving out as explanation as to why he could not bring any witnesses.