Hon’ble Ajit Kumar, J.—Heard Shri H.M.B. Sinha, learned Advocate for the appellants and Shri V.K. Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri S. Shekhar Advocate for the respondents.

2. This Second Appeal was admitted on 23.12.1999, on the substantial questions of law No. III as framed in the memo of appeal:

“III. Whether the lower appellate Court was justified in allowing the additional evidence at the appellate stage although none of the conditions mentioned in the Order 41 Rule 27 of the C.P.C. For production of Additional evidence in appellate Court exist in the case.”

3. Learned Senior Advocate, Shri V.K. Singh argued that said (supra) substantial question of law does not arise in the present appeal inasmuch as the substantial question of law No. III is not at all substantial question of law.

4. Coming to the basic pleading of the parties, the plaintiff-appellant herein instituted suit seeking declaratory decree in respect of three properties given in the foot of the plaint as Schedule A, B & C. The claim set up by plaintiff-appellant is that husband of the defendant No. 1 (Smt. Ramo Devi) executed Will on 2.2.1949 with free mind, and without any pressure in respect of the