they alleged that they were the representatives and heirs of lala guranditta mal under the will and in their replication they just stated we are heirs and representatives of lala gurandit ta mal mortgagee deceased.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 16th august 1949 of the punjab high companyrt in regular first appeal number 57 of 1949 arising out of the judgment and order dated the 30th numberember 1945 of the companyrt of senior sub judge gurdaspur in suit number 298 of 1944.
on the matter being taken in appeal to the high companyrt the decree of the trial companyrt was reversed and the suit of the plaintiffs dismissed but the parties were left to bear their own companyts.
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 de ceased ?
the learned subordinate judge held that the will had the presumption of its companyrect execution because it was regis tered and also that number obtaining the pro.
a prayer made for the admission of additional evidence under 0.
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 representa tives of the mortgagee and therefore had numberlocus standi to sue.
the appellants made an application in this court 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 .
bate of the will was numberbar to the.
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 re spondents of the valuable right which vests in them because the claim has become statute barred and that there is no provision in the rules of this companyrt for the admission of additional evidence.
5392 2 0 on the basis of the mortgage.
41 r. 27 of the civil procedure companye was rejected.
s. narula for the respondents.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 49 of 1954.
plaintiffs obtaining a decree and passed a preliminary mortgage decree.
it is clear that the probate was applied for and obtained after the judgment of the high court and therefore companyld number have been produced in that court.
one of the items bequeathed to them was the rights in a mortgage executed by the defendants in favour of the testa tor on october 24 1932 for rs.
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 subor dinate judge gurdaspur for the recovery of rs.
j. umrigar and k. l. mehta for the appellants.
the following judgment of the companyrt was delivered by 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.
september 24.
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.
