IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MANDEEP PANNU, J
Mohan Singh @ Mohan Dass – Appellant
Versus
Ajmer Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the petitioner's claim of forgery regarding the promissory note. (Para 2) |
MANDEEP PANNU J.
1. The present civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner/defendant for setting aside the impugned order dated 06.08.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Barnala, whereby the application dated 27.08.2024 moved by the petitioner for permitting a handwriting and fingerprint expert to inspect and take photographs of the promissory note and receipt was dismissed.
Brief Facts
2. It is submitted that a civil suit was instituted by the respondent/plaintiff against the petitioner/defendant for recovery of ₹13,60,000/–. The suit was on the basis of a promissory note and receipt alleged to have been executed by the petitioner in favour of the respondent and signed by certain witnesses. The petitioner filed written statement submitting that no loan was obtained by him and that the promissory note and receipt were forged and fabricated and that there were material alterations and cuttings therein. It was further pleaded that the respondent is doing the business of commission agent, and TRI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.