C.R. No. 7262 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 7262 of 2009 Date of Decision: December 9, 2009 Raj Rani and others …..Petitioners Vs. Santosh and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.P.K. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Vide impugned order dated November 14, 2009, Santosh, petitioner (now respondent No.1) in petition under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act has been permitted to examine herself by allowing her application. Counsel for the petitioners has contended that respondent- Santosh had earlier moved an application to examine herself as her own witness. Said application was dismissed on May 30, 2009. She opted not to C.R. No. 7262 of 2009 [2] prefer any revision against the said order but subsequently on her second application dated August 20, 2009, filed for permission to examine herself as her own witness, vide impugned order, she has been given permission to examine herself as her own witness exercising the discretionary power under Section 151 CPC. After hearing counsel for the petitioners, I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case. It appears that Santosh alongwith her daughters, claiming to be widow of Som Nath, has applied for succession certificate regarding the Estate of Som Nath against general public but the petitioners were impleaded as respondent in the case on the basis of the claim that petitioner No.1 is the widow of Som Nath and that petitioner No.2 is the son of petitioner No.1 born out of her wedlock with Som Nath. Respondent Santosh seems to have examined six witnesses. Petitioners who are respondents before the trial Court have also produced their evidence. In peculiar circumstances of the case, where the succession is to be determined on the basis of marital relationship of Som Nath, it is expedient in the interest of justice to record the statement of Santosh- respondent No.1 who claims herself to be widow of Som Nath, so that she may be examined and thoroughly cross-examined by the petitioners to defeat her claim. Her examination and cross-examination will help the Court to arrive at a just conclusion for deciding the matter under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act. The trial Court has given detailed reasons for permitting respondent- Santosh to examine herself before C.R. No. 7262 of 2009 [3] exercising the discretion under Section 151 CPC. The discretion seems to have been rightly used to arrive at the just decision. No ground is made out for interference. It is made clear that in case certain facts warranting production of rebuttal evidence by the petitioner are brought on the record, the trial Court will permit the petitioners to produce evidence to rebut the new facts brought on the record by respondent Santosh by appearing as a witness. It is also made clear that if any steps are taken to linger on the proceedings in the garb of the impugned order by not producing respondent No.1 on the date fixed, it will be open to the trial Court to proceed in accordance with law. Disposed of. December 9, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE