NARENDRA SINGH Vs. SMT. GURMEL KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution takes exception to the order dated 15.9.2017 whereby the court below rejected an application filed by the petitioners under section 45 of the Evidence Act.

(2.) Briefly stated the relevant facts are that the petitioners/ plaintiffs filed a suit for specific performance. In the said suit, at the stage of final hearing, the petitioners filed an application under section 45 of the Evidence Act on 20.4.2017 (Annexure P/4). The respondents filed their reply on 19.5.2017 (Annexure P/3). The court below rejected the said application by impugned order dated 15.9.2017.

(3.) Shri Qasim Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners criticized this order by contending that the court below is required to take all necessary steps to separate the wheat from chaff. Since parties are not idem on the question of genuineness of the agreement which is the subject matter of suit, it is necessary to examine the signatures on the said agreement Exhibit P/1. Shri Ali submits that the court below has erred in rejecting the said application on the ground of delay. Reliance is placed on division bench judgment of this court delivered in the case of L.S.Trading Company Vs. Manish Mishra-2010(4) MPLJ 228.