SUBHASH KUMAR BINDLISH Vs. NASIBO AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision is preferred by the plaintiff aggrieved by the dismissal of the application filed by him to subject the disputed thumb impression of defendant No.1 Nasibo who denied having affixed her thumb impression in the agreement of sale alleged to have been executed by her in favour of the plaintiff.

(2.) The trial Court having observed that there was a delay in moving such an application by the plaintiff inasmuch as, no attempt was made to subject the disputed thumb impression to the scrutiny of the expert immediately after the written statement was filed on 13.2.2007, chose to dismiss the application filed by the plaintiff.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that the development that took place after the written statement filed by the defendant was not taken into consideration by the trial Court. He would submit that one of the witnesses to the agreement for sale could not be traced. That was the reason why the plaintiff has chosen to subject the disputed finger-print of defendant No.1 for the scrutiny of the expert.