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

1959 Supreme(MP) 54

P.V.DIXIT
MANNALAL SARDARMAL JAIN – Appellant
Versus
RAMKISHAN JODHRAJ MAHARAJ – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.K.Vijayavargi, SHINGAL

P. V. DIXIT, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 476-B, Cr. P. C. , from an order of the District judge of Indore, directing a complaint to be filed against the appellant in respect of an offence under Section 193, I. P. C.

( 2 ) THE material facts are that in a suit filed by the respondent against the appellant and his brother Dhannalal in the Court of the District Judge of Indore, for the recovery of Rs. 63227-8-0 as the balance due on account of certain transactions, the plaintiff tendered in evidence a statement of accounts said to have been made up by the appellant himself in his own hand. The appellant denied that the statement was written out by him. In his evidence the plaintiff Ramkishan stated that the appellant had himself written out the statement of accounts in question and had given it to him. The plaintiff also examined a handwriting expert to show that the statement was in the handwriting of the appellant. On a consideration of the statement of the plaintiff and the deposition of the handwriting expert and the probabilities of the case, the learned District Judge came to the conclusion that the statement of account was in the hand-writing of the appellant Manna







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