SANJEEVARAYAPPA Vs. UGRAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition by the plaintiff in O.S.No.42/2017 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Pavagada (for short, 'the trial Court') is directed against the impugned order passed on I.A.No.XX whereby, the said application filed by the respondent No.1-defendant No.1 under Order XXVI Rule 10(A) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'CPC') to send the dispute LTM of the plaintiff on Ex.D14 for scientific investigation by the forensic science laboratory with the admitted LTMs of the plaintiff was allowed by the trial Court.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. For the order proposed, notice to the fourth respondent stands dispensed with.

(3.) The material on record discloses that the petitioner- plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit for partition and separate possession of his alleged share in the suit schedule immovable properties. The said suit is being contested by the respondents- defendants. During the course of trial, the respondent No.1- defendant No.1 produced a document marked as Ex.D14 and alleged/contended that the same contains the LTM of the petitioner-plaintiff. However, the petitioner-plaintiff disputed and denied the said contention and contended that the alleged LTM contained in Ex.D14 was not that of the petitioner-plaintiff and that the said document (Ex.D14) was a concocted and fabricated document. It was also contended that since the stamp paper did not contain the names of the petitioner or the respondents, the said document was clearly a fabricated and concocted document and also that the said document is not a registered document and therefore, inadmissible in evidence.