PRITAM SINGH Vs. AMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed to assail the order dtd. 26/8/2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dhuri, District Sangrur, whereby the application dtd. 18/7/2025 moved by the plaintiff for directing defendants No. 1 and 2 to furnish their specimen signatures and handwriting for comparison with the disputed writing dtd. 12/12/2001 has been dismissed.

(2.) The brief facts are that the petitioner-plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration claiming himself to be exclusive owner in possession of land measuring 106 Bighas 4 Biswas on the basis of a partition agreement dtd. 12/12/2001 allegedly executed between him, defendants No. 1 and 2, and Nikka Singh (since deceased). In the written statement, the defendants denied the execution of such writing, terming it forged and fabricated. Issues were framed on 3/9/2024 and thereafter both parties led evidence. The plaintiff examined himself and other witnesses in support of the writing. The defendants led their evidence and contested the genuineness of the document. At that stage, when the case was fixed for rebuttal evidence, the plaintiff moved the instant application to obtain specimen handwriting and signatures of defendants No. 1 and 2 for comparison with the signatures on the disputed writing dtd. 12/12/2001.

(3.) The trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that the plaintiff had already availed sufficient opportunity to lead his affirmative evidence, that there was no fresh question in rebuttal, and that permitting such evidence would amount to giving the plaintiff a second opportunity to fill up lacunae in his case. It was observed that once the burden to prove the disputed writing lay upon the plaintiff, such evidence ought to have been led in his affirmative stage and not at the stage of rebuttal.