KIRPAL SINGH Vs. CHARANJIT KAUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT revision petition is directed against the order dated 7.3.2011, passed by the trial court, whereby application of the petitioner for appointment of a fresh Handwriting and Finger Print Expert for the purpose of verification of signatures of plaintiffs on the Vakalatnama, has been dismissed. Mr. Sachdev, learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order. According to him, in view of two conflicting reports given by the earlier Expert to the rival parties, petitioner was entitled to seek appointment of another handwriting expert. Trial court has erroneously rejected the application.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents has opposed the plea. According to him, the petitioner earlier approached this court by way of Civil Revision No. 414 of 2011 wherein he was allowed to re -examine Handwriting Expert namely, Fateh Chand Sharma. By now evidence of the petitioner has been closed by order. Thus, no cause of action survives.

(3.) IT appears that a suit was filed by the plaintiff/respondents seeking a declaration that decree dated 22.8.2003 be declared null and void. Suit was resisted by the defendant/petitioner contending that decree was rightly passed by the court after contest. Plaintiffs had given duly signed power of attorney and other documents containing their signatures. During the pendency of proceedings an application was moved for examining handwriting expert. One Fateh Chand Sharma appeared as a witness. However, testimony of said witness was questioned by the petitioner on the ground that he had given conflicting report to rival parties. He, thus, moved an application for declaring the said witness hostile. On the application being rejected, Civil Revision No. 414 of 2011 was preferred before this court. Same was disposed of on January 20, 2011, operative part whereof read as under: -