JUDGMENT 1. - An application is filed by the legal representative of the respondent-deceased Smt. Dalkauri to be impleaded as a Party-respondent in place of the deceased Smt. Dalkauri. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants Mr. Jain has prayed for three weeks' time.That request was rejected by me.Thereafter, learned counsel for the appellants objected to the grant of this application filed by the legal representative of the deceased Smt. Dalkauri on the ground that this Court cannot grant the application straight-way, and it must be sent to the trial Court for the inquiry to find out whether he is real legal representative of the deceased Smt. Dalkauri or not. He also doubted the genuineness of the certified copy of the Will executed by the deceased Smt. Dalkauri in favour of the legal representative, which has been placed on record of this case by the legal representative of the deceased along with the application to be impleaded as the party- respondent. He objected the same on the ground that he was not given the copy of that Will. The certified copy which has come on the record of this case, was shown to the learned counsel Mr. Jain. He had seen it and maintained that it may he a forged document, and therefore, the Court must send it for inquiry to the trial Court. 3. According to the learned counsel for the legal representative of the deceased, the applicant who wants to be impleaded as party-respondent In place of Dalkauri, is the legal representative of the deceased Smt. Dalkauri as he is real nephew of deceased Dalkauri and as per the Will also, he has become entitled to claim the share in the property. 4. When certified copy of the Will is produced by the legal representative, it cannot be doubted. In fact, an application was made by the appellants under Order 22 Rule 4-A on the ground that there is no legal representative of the deceased Smt. Dalkauri, which was rejected by me on 6-3-1995. It will be open to the appellants to come to this Court. If they point out any concrete evidence to prove that the certified copy of the Will, alleged to have been executed by the deceased Smt. Dalkauri, is forged and also the Will itself. It will be open to the appellants to come to this Court. If they point out any concrete evidence to prove that the certified copy of the Will, alleged to have been executed by the deceased Smt. Dalkauri, is forged and also the Will itself. The objection that this Court cannot grant the application straightway and for that this Court has to send it to the subordinate Court or the trial Court, is absolutely baseless. 5. Proviso to Order 22 Rule 5 only provides that if the Court wants, then it may send it for further inquiry, if it is. If otherwise satisfied, then there is no question of sending the matter for subordinate Court. 6. There is enough material on record to grant the application of the legal representative of the deceased - Smt. Dalkauri, and accordingly, the application is granted. The appellants are now directed to correct the cause title, and then the first appeal will be placed for admission within two weeks from today.Application disposed of. *******