SUMANTLAL CHIMANLAL DAVE Vs. GOVINDLAL HIMATLAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) * * * *

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellant has sought to raise a question of law from the fact that the trial Court had examined the documents on which there were admitted signatures and documents which bore the disputed signature, and by comparing the two had formed an opinion as to the genuineness of the defendant's signature on Exh. 24/2 and discarding Exh. 42 as not bearing the signature of the plaintiff. The main thrust of the contention was that the Court ought not to have examined these documents by itself for the purpose of forming its opinion, and not that the Court could not in law have done so.

(3.) In this context, learned Counsel for the appellant sought to rely upon a number of decisions.