SATPAL AND ANR. Vs. SURINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 14.5.2007 passed by the Rent Controller, Barnala whereby the application filed by the respondent (petitioner herein) in the eviction petition for direction to the other side to provide fresh specimen signatures 10 times has been rejected. From the impugned order, it is evident that there is a dispute of rent receipt which has been denied by the other side. The petitioner herein earlier made an application for a direction to the opposite side to appear in the court and provide the handwriting for comparison by the expert. The trial court vide its order dated 20.3.2007 permitted the petitioner to obtain specimen writing and respondent Surinder Kumar was asked to appear before the Court and give the specimen handwriting which order was complied with. Thereafter another application has been made by the petitioner before the trial court seeking a further direction that the respondent be directed to again appear and again provide 10 times specimen writing to enable the expert to give his opinion. This prayer has been rejected by the trial Court vide the impugned order, on two grounds. firstly when the earlier application was made, no such prayer was made in that application and secondly that such a prayer is not warranted by law.

(2.) I have perused the impugned order. 1 agree with the finding of the trial Court. The petitioner cannot compel the other side to give specimen signatures as desired by the petitioner herein. The petitioner is at liberty to establish the handwriting of the respondent, in accordance with law.

(3.) In view of the above, I find no merit in this revision petition which is accordingly dismissed.