Back
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Jagjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
Surinder Kumar (since deceased) through LRs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Meenakshi I. Mehta, J.) :
By filing the instant revision-petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-defendant (here-in-after to be referred as ‘the defendant’) has laid challenge to the order (Annexure P-5) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala (for short ‘the trial Court’) on 13.10.2023 in Civil Suit No.197 of 2017 titled as ‘Surinder Kumar Vs. Jagjit Singh’, whereby the application moved by him with the prayer to send the original Pronote and the Receipt dated 02.06.2015 to the Indian Security Press, Government of India, Nasik, for ascertaining the age, i.e the date and year of the printing/issuance, of the revenue-stamps affixed/pasted thereon, has been dismissed.
2. Bereft of the unnecessary details, the facts, as emanating from the perusal of the file and culminating in the filing of the present revision petition, are that the respondent-plaintiff (since deceased and represented through his LRs and here-in-after to be referred as ‘the plaintiff’) filed a Civil Suit for seeking a decree for the recovery of Rs.16,95,000/- from the defendant, along-with the interest, while averring that the defendant had borrowed a sum of
The court established that the use of old revenue stamps on later documents is permissible under law, and verification of their age is not necessary for adjudication.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act and the relevance of sending the suit promissory note to the Government of India Security ....
The absence of reliable scientific methods to determine the age of ink or documents limits the admissibility of such evidence in court, impacting the ability to establish the execution date of a prom....
There is no scientific method to determine the age of the writing or ink, as established in previous decisions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the discretion to allow or reject belated applications under Sec. 45 of the Indian Evidence Act lies with the Court, and no hard and fast rule....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
