Back
B. S. BHANUMATHI
Ch. Venkata Sathyavathi – Appellant
Versus
E. Rambabu – Respondent
ORDER :
1. These two revisions, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, by the unsuccessful plaintiff are directed against the orders dated 13.12.2022, of the learned VII Additional District Judge-cum-IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, at Vijayawada, passed in I.A. Nos. 189 of 2020 and 190 of 2020 in O.S. No. 305 of 2006 respectively.
2. Heard Ms. K. Sridevi, learned counsel for the revision petitioner/plaintiff and Sri Y.V. Nagabhushana Rao, learned counsel for the respondent/defendant.
3. Since the parties are same, both these revisions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. The parties in these two revisions shall hereinafter be referred to as the plaintiff and defendant, as arrayed in the suit, for convenience and clarity.
4. The facts that lead to filing of these revisions by the plaintiff, in brief, are as follows:
The court established that the power to recall witnesses and seek expert opinions must be used to clarify ambiguities, not to remedy evidentiary deficiencies.
The discretion of the court to seek expert opinion on disputed signatures is upheld, regardless of time gaps between signatures on different documents.
The time gap between admitted and disputed documents need not be within three years for signature comparison, and the court should consider the defendant's plea in the written statement when deciding....
A party seeking to send a document for expert comparison must provide authentic documents containing admitted signatures; failure to do so results in dismissal of the application.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of expert opinions on identity of handwriting and the comparison of signatures, as provided under Section 45 and Section 73 of the I....
Expert opinion – Power to seek expert opinion under Section 45 of Evidence Act, 1872 is discretionary and depends on facts of each case – Courts can refuse expert opinion only when no doubt exists re....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the discretion to allow or reject belated applications under Sec. 45 of the Indian Evidence Act lies with the Court, and no hard and fast rule....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
