SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1950 Supreme(Cal) 21

HARRIES, SARKAR
Aswini Kumar Bhandari – Appellant
Versus
Anukul Chandra Bhandari – Respondent


Advocates:
Robindra Nath Bhattacharjee - for Petitioner.
Sarat Chandra Janah and Binode Behari Haldar - for Opposite Party.

Judgement

HARRIES, C.J. :- This is an application for revision of an order made by a learned Sub-ordinate Judge refusing to allow certain signatures to be examined by an expert and further refusing to summon the expert to give evidence at the cost of the petitioner.

2. The plaintiff desired that the genuineness of certain signatures should be considered and he applied that an expert should be summoned by the Court to examine the signatures and report thereon. This petition was refused as it was a belated one.

3. The plaintiff then applied that a summons should be served by the Court on a Mr. Bennet of Calcutta who is a hand-writing expert to appear in Court and give evidence as to the genuineness or not of the signature or signatures in question. The plaintiff asked for the summons to be issued at his expense; but the Court refused to issue the summons on this witness because the application was made at such a late stage;

4. The power of a Court to issue summonses to witnesses to attend to give evidence is dealt with in O. 16, R. 1. The rule is as follows :

"At any time after the suit is instituted, the partial may obtain, on application to the Court or to such officer as it appoints in










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top