Mr. Rajan Gupta, J.:- Present revision petition is directed against the order dated 29.03.2016, passed by the trial court, whereby application moved by the petitioner for framing additional issue has been rejected.

2. Mr. Chadha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner argued before the court that the trial court erred in not framing any issue regarding the codicil relied upon by the plaintiff, thus, no evidence could be led regarding the same. Instant application was moved for framing additional issue. Same has been erroneously rejected by the court below. He has placed reliance on judgments reported as Chebrol Sriramalu vs. Vakalapudi Satyanarayana, [2014(2) Law Herald (SC) 1473 : 2014(3) Law Herald (P&H) 2123 (SC)] : 2013 (9) SCC 404 and Nazar Singh vs. Satnam Singh and others, [2014(5) Law Herald (P&H) 4266] : 2015 (4) R.C.R. (Civil) 51 in support of the contention that additional issue can be framed at any stage of the proceedings. Same could not have been rejected only on the ground that there was delay in moving the application.

3. Prayer was opposed by counsel appearing for respondent No.1. He stated that no codicil was ever executed by Amar Nath. The instant applic