RAVI NATH TILHARI
Whitemen Constructions Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Tammana Lakshmi Kalyani – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Goli G.V.S. Sai, learned Counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in OS No.64 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the II Additional District Judge at Visakhapatnam. He filed the suit against the defendants/respondents for specific performance of contract to execute a regular sale deed in his favour and to put in physical possession of the plaint schedule property and for other reliefs.
3. In OS No.64 of 2020, the defendants filed written statement, inter alia, denying the execution of the sale agreement dated 07.05.2018 and raising the plea of forgery with respect to that agreement.
4. The defendants also filed IA No.314 of 2022 under Section 45 of the Indian EVIDENCE ACT , to send the sale agreement for opinion of the expert.
5. The plaintiff filed objection and contested the application.
6. The learned II Additional District Judge, however, by the order dated 22.10.2024, allowed the I.A., after recording that the suit agreement of sale dated 07.05.2018 could be send to the handwriting expert for comparison with the admitted signatures of the 1st defendant in the document being produced by the defendants with further directions as under vi
The validity of handwriting expert opinions in signature verification hinges on the availability of reliable, contemporaneous signatures from the defendants for comparison.
The allowance of pre-trial applications to send disputed documents for Expert opinion is improper and constitutes a material irregularity.
The time gap between signatures does not prevent expert comparison, and the determination of document validity is at the court's discretion.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.