SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(P&H) 2012

RAJ MOHAN SINGH
Dharam Singh – Appellant
Versus
Labh Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents No.2 and 3:Mr. Ramandeep, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, J.: (Oral) - Petitioner has filed this revision petition against the order dated 02.02.2016 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Samana, vide which prayer for leading evidence in rebuttal was dismissed.

2. Plaintiff filed a suit for joint possession of land measuring 25 kanals, 12 marlas along with declaration and permanent injunction on the basis of natural succession. Defendants appeared in the Court and filed their written statement in which they relied upon unregistered Will dated 17.05.1996. The issue was framed, the onus of which was fastened upon the defendant i.e.

“Whether the Will dated 17.05.1996 was executed by Niranjan Singh son of Sewa Singh in favour of defendants No.2 and 3? OPD”

3. Apparently, the onus of the issue was on the defendants and therefore, the plaintiff has a right to rebut the same in his rebuttal. It is not a situation where the plaintiff wants to lead evidence in rebuttal in respect of an issue, the onus of which was on the plaintiff himself. Here is a case, where defendants have set up an unregistered Will in their written statement and necessary issue was framed, thereby putting the onus on the defendants themselves






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top