The necessity of expert testimony under Section 45 of the Evidence Act is essential for proving the authenticity of documents in legal proceedings.

ORDER :

Mr. Arun Monga, J. - Petition herein is directed against an order dated 20.02.2023 passed by learned trial Court, Sri. Ganganagar whereby applications under Order 16, Rule 1 (3) CPC and Order 13, Rule 10 read with section 151 CPC have been rejected by a common order.

2. Succinct facts first, as pleaded in the instant writ petition.

2.1 The plaintiff-respondent has filed a suit for specific performance of the contract dated 06.09.2008 averring therein that plaintiff and defendant/petitioner are close relatives; in order to get a small house constructed, the plaintiff-respondent approached the petitioner who agreed to sell a plot situated at Murraba No.12 in Kila No.21 measuring 65 x 165 for Rs. 7,50,000/- and an agreement to this effect was created. It has been further averred that plaintiff was given possession of the property in question. It was alleged that at the agreed time for execution of the sale deed, the petitioner refused to execute the sale deed and, therefore, the suit was preferred.

2.2 The petitioner filed written statement stating that neither any agreement was executed between the parties nor any stamp was purchased by the defendant-petitioner. It was submitted that FIR has also been lodged against the plaintiff. Further objections with regard to maintainability of the suit has also been raised.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the FSL report itself the agreement/document in question has not been signed by the petitioner. The document expert, who prepared the FSL report is required to be produced before the learned trial Court. As per Section 45 of the Evidence Act, the expert evidence on handwriting can be proved by way of producing the expert in the witness box. The certified copy of the document which was produced in the learned trial Court. Its original is lying in the record of the pending criminal proceedings before the ACJM Court between the same parties. For proving the FSL report, its author is a necessary witness, who is required to be summoned by learned trial Court. Learned Court below has thus committed grave error by ignoring the facts of the case. Therefore, the present writ petition may kindly be allowed.

4. Vide order dated 24.04.2023, service was directed to be effected through learned counsel representing the respondents before the trial Court. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted a proof of service in terms there of which is taken on record.

5. Despite service none appears for the respondents, which is suggestive that they have no serious objection to the writ petition being allowed.

6. Be that as it may, having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that no prejudice would be caused to the opposite party if the prayer for summoning the concerned official with record of the pending criminal proceeding before the ACJM Court containing the original FSL report and it's author Dr. Ramesh Choudhary for proving the report is allowed and, the petitioner is allowed to examine them in accordance with law.

7. Furthermore, it transpires that earlier an application was also submitted for summoning of the FSL report. But subsequently, certified copy of the FSL report was received by the petitioner. The same has though been submitted/filed before the learned trial Court, but its authenticity is to be proved from the signatory of the document i.e. Dr. Ramesh Chander Gandhi, Assistant Director of FSL, Jodhpur. As such, petitioner herein rightly preferred an application for summoning Dr. Ramesh Chander Gandhi. Learned Court below ought to have thus appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case and allowed the application.

8. In the premise, impugned order dated 20.02.2023 is set aside and the petitioner's applications under Order 16, Rule 1 (3) CPC and Order 13, Rule 10 read with section 151 CPC are allowed. The learned trial Court shall proceed further with the matter in accordance with law.

9. The petition is allowed, as