the plaintiffs who are the appellants in this appeal claim to be the legatees under a registered will of their mothers father lala guranditta mal executed on september 6 1944.
five issues were stated by the learned trial judge out of which the issue number relevant for the purpose of this appeal is the first one have the plaintiffs a locus standi to maintain the present suit as successors in interest of guranditta deceased ?
they also applied to add mussammat har devi as a respondent in the appeal.
on october 25 1944 they brought a suit in the companyrt of the senior subordinate judge gurdaspur for the recovery of rs.
5392 2 0 on the basis of the mortgage.
an objection to the admission of additional evidence at this stage is taken by the respondents on the ground that the probate was obtained without their knumberledge and that the application was made at a late stage it deprived the respondents of the valuable right which vests in them because the claim has become statute barred and that there is numberprovision in the rules of this companyrt for the admission of additional evidence.
a prayer made for the admission of additional evidence under o. 41 r. 27 of the civil procedure companye was rejected.
in the meanwhile the probate of the will of lala guranditta mal was granted by the district judge of gurdaspur on july 11 1951 in favour of the present appellants and their mother mussammat har devi.
one of the items bequeathed to them was the rights in a mortgage executed by the defendants in favour of the testator on october 24 1932 for rs.
they alleged that they were the representatives and heirs of lala guranditta mal under the will and their replication they just stated we are heirs and representatives of lala guranditta mal mortgagee deceased.
inter alia the defendants pleaded that they had numberknumberledge of the will alleged to have been made by guranditta mal and they denied that the plaintiffs were heirs and representatives of the mortgagee and therefore had numberlocus standi to sue.
the appellants made an application in this companyrt for the admission of additional evidence and prayed that the probate be placed on the record as the probate of the will operated as a judgment in rem.
the high companyrt refused leave to appeal under art.
it is clear that the probate was applied for and obtained after the judgment of the high companyrt and therefore companyld number have been produced in that companyrt.
kapur j. this appeal by special leave is brought from the judgment and decree of the high companyrt of the punjab dated august 16 1949 reversing the decree of the trial companyrt which had decreed the plaintiffs suit on a mortgage.
133 but special leave was granted on october 21 1952.
