PRITAM SINGH Vs. TILAK RAJ AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF Pritam Singh is aggrieved by order dated 01.10.2013 (Annexure P -1), passed by the trial court, thereby dismissing application filed by the plaintiff -petitioner for permitting the plaintiff -petitioner to examine handwriting and finger -print expert as witness and has, therefore, filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the said order. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

(2.) EVIDENCE of the plaintiff was earlier closed by the trial court by court order dated 28.02.2013. Thereafter, defendants' evidence was closed on 14.05.2013. Plaintiff filed the aforesaid application on 02.08.2013. However, thereafter, this Court vide order dated 10.09.2013, passed in revision petition challenging order dated 28.02.2013, directed the trial court to grant one more opportunity to the plaintiff to conclude his evidence, subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/ - as costs. The trial court dismissed the aforesaid application of the plaintiff observing that the expert could not be examined by the plaintiff in rebuttal evidence because the evidence is of affirmative issue.

(3.) WHEN application was filed by the plaintiff on 02.08.2013, the same could not be allowed because the expert could not be examined in rebuttal, his evidence being of affirmative issue. However, when the impugned order was passed on 01.10.2013, this Court had already directed the trial court to grant one more opportunity to the plaintiff for his affirmative evidence, on payment of costs. In view thereof, the application filed by the plaintiff for examining the expert as witness should have been allowed and plaintiff should have been permitted to examine the expert witness at the time of availing the said one opportunity for his affirmative evidence.