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

2013 Supreme(P&H) 1188

PARAMJEET SINGH
Chamkaur Singh – Appellant
Versus
Mithu Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. M.J.S. Bedi, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Malkeet Singh Balianwali, Advocate, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

PARAMJEET SINGH, J.

Calling of experts as witnesses by parties to the litigation in India at least relates back from the date when the Evidence Act was enforced in India in the year 1872.

Through this civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner assails the order dated 07.05.2013 (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Phul whereby application filed by the petitioner-defendant for sending the pronote and receipt in dispute (in short the questioned documents) to the State Forensic Science Laboratory (in short SFSL) has been dismissed.

Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts relevant for disposal of the present petition are to the effect that respondent-plaintiff filed suit for recovery of Rs. 4,03,200/- on the basis of questioned documents. Upon notice, the petitioner-defendant put in appearance through counsel and filed his written statement. Various objections were taken. One of the objections was that questioned documents were forged and fabricated and material alterations and additions had been made therein. On pleadings of parties, issues were framed and parties led their respective evidence. T
























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