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

2009 Supreme(Mad) 2594

M.M.SUNDRESH
S. Chinnathai – Appellant
Versus
K. C. Chinnadurai – Respondent


ADVOCATES APPEARED:
For the Petitioner:Anand Chandrasekar, Sarvabhauman Associates, Advocates.
For the Respondent:J. Viswanathan, Advocate.

Judgment :-

The present revision has been filed by the defendant in the suit, challenging the dismissal of the application filed in I.A.No.402 of 2006 in O.S.No.685 of 2003, wherein, the petitioner has sought for the report of the Forensic Expert by comparing the alleged signature of the petitioner found in the suit agreement with that of the vakalat, written statement and Ex.A6, sale deed.

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

The petitioner herein, is the defendant in the suit. The suit is filed for specific performance based upon the agreement signed by the petitioner. Pending the suit filed in O.S.No.685 of 2003, an application was filed by the petitioner seeking a report of the Forensic Expert for comparison of signatures. The said application was dismissed by the Court below, holding that Ex.A1 cannot be compared with the vakalat, written statement and Ex.A6, being a xeror copy of the sale deed. The Court below also dismissed the application on the ground of delay. Challenging the same, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition.

3. In order to appreciate the contention of the parties, the provisions contended in Order 26 Rule 10A of the Civil Procedure Code






























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