VIPULBHAI DHAMJIBHAI RATHOD Vs. ALKA VIPUL RATHOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Sandeep R. Limbani, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Hemal Shah, learned advocate for the respondent.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the present petition as could be gathered from the petition and its accompaniments are that:

(3.) Mr. Limbani, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that no prejudice is likely to be caused to the respondent wife, if the orders passed below Exhibit 77 and 78 are set aside and the petitioner is permitted to adduce the evidence as the respondent will have an opportunity to cross- examine the witness. He vehemently submitted that the dealy which is attributed to the petitioner in para 2 of the order below Exhibit 77 for making himself available for cross- examination, should not come in the way of doing justice. He, therefore, submitted that the report of handwriting, which is awaited in another proceedings between the parties is relevant in the proceedings under Section 9 of the HM Act under Section 6 of the Evidence Act is the transaction is the similar. He therefore, stoutly urged that to sub-serve the ends of justice, the orders passed below Exhibit 77 and 78 may be quashed and set aside and the petitioner may be permitted to examine the handwriting expert and other witnesses.