GOWRI SHANKAR Vs. J L BABU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition arises out of order, dated 29.8.2011, in IA No.1711 of 2010 in OS No. 1401 of 2007, on the file of the Court of the learned V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

(2.) I have heard Sri P. Ramachandran, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record.

(3.) UNDER Section 73 of the Act, the Court is empowered to ascertain whether a signature, handwriting or seal is that of the person, by whom it purports to have been written or made, and compare any signature, writing or seal, admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court, to have been written or made by that person with the one, which is to be proved. This provision, thus, enables the Court to undertake the exercise of comparison of the signature, writing or seal without need for sending the same to the opinion of the handwriting expert. Section 45 of the Act recognized the opinions of the experts in handwriting or finger impressions as relevant facts. In my opinion, Section 45 does not cast an obligation on the Courts to send a disputed document for expert's opinion as a matter of course. It is only when the Court forms an opinion that, having regard to the facts of the particular case, it is necessary for ascertaining the opinion of the expert, that it can send the handwriting or finger impression for an expert opinion. Therefore, if the Court below, having regard to the facts of the case, exercises its discretion not to send the document for the opinion of the expert, the party has no right to insist that such document should be sent for the opinion of the expert. The judgment in Thumu Srikanth v. Akula Babu, 2010. (5) ALD 795, on which the learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance, does not advance the case of the petitioner because in that case this Court has opined that, having regard to the fact that the thumb impression as well as signature were disputed, it is appropriate that the same should have been sent for the opinion of the expert. No hard and fast rule can be laid down in this regard and the Court has to exercise its discretion in a sound and rational manner having regard to the facts involved in the case brought before it.