IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 5852 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision: 7.9.2009 Chhinder Pal Kaur ....Petitioner. Versus Pargat Singh and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. A.S. Sivia, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. In this revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the defendant-petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order dated 18.9.2007 (Annexure P-3) passed by the trial court whereby the application filed by her under Order 18 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for leading additional evidence, was dismissed. Defendant No.1 by way of the additional evidence wanted to examine some legal representative of Banta Singh, Numberdar, who was one of the attesting witnesses of the disputed Will, and the then Joint Sub-Registrar, Gidderbaha, Shri Bala Ram, to prove endorsement on the reverse side of the original registered Will. It is not disputed that the defendant-petitioner had earlier summoned the other attesting witness of the Will, namely, Basant C.R. No. 5852 of 2007 -2- Singh, for proving the Will but later on without examining him had closed her evidence. The trial court had recorded that it cannot be said that the said evidence was not in the knowledge of the defendant- petitioner and, therefore, she cannot be allowed to lead additional evidence under such circumstances. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the file, this Court is satisfied that there is no illegality or perversity in the order dated 18.9.2007 (Annexure P-3) passed by the trial court which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, there is no merit in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. September 7, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE