JUDGMENT Mahesh Grover, J.:- The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 15.5.2009 vide which their application for permission to examine an expert witness was declined. The petitioners are defendants in the suit and their evidence commenced first. The dispute inter se between the parties is regarding a Will. The petitioners having discharged their onus faced the evidence led by the respondent who is the plaintiff. In her evidence the respondent produced some sale deed supposedly executed by the deceased and tried to dispute the signatures of the petitioners which appeared in the Will and also on the sale deed. The petitioners then wanted to produce the evidence in order to offset this piece of evidence which came subsequently. Their prayer having been declined, the instant revision petition has been filed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the sale deed as a piece of evidence was never in his knowledge and, therefore, this has necessitated the calling of the expert witness in order to offset the impact of the said document. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, tried to justify the passing of the impugned order by the learned trial court. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the petitioners, who have been taken by surprise by the document which was not in their knowledge, have every right to offset the impact of such a document which has been produced by the respondent and in any eventuality the same is necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter. 5. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioners are granted one opportunity to produce the expert witness. The trial Court shall not afford more than one opportunity to the petitioners to do the needful. -----------