GURMEET SINGH Vs. AJMER SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against an order of the trial Court dated May 22, 1987, whereby the application filed by the defendant petitioner under Order 18 Rule 17-A, Code of Civil Procedure, (hereinafter called the Code), was dismissed.

(2.) The defendant-petitioner moved the application under Order 18 Rule 17-A of the Code for permission to produce the handwriting expert and the record-keeper of The Tribune as the witnesses on his behalf. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs made a statement that he had no objection if the defendant was allowed to examine the witness, i.e. the record keeper of The Tribune to prove the advertisement about the missing of Harbhagat Singh, but objected to the production of the handwriting expert to compare the signatures of Harbhagat Singh on the alleged gift deed. The trial Court dismissed the application filed by the defendant on the ground :

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that since the said attesting witness Harbhagat singh was missing, the defendant wanted to prove his signature on the alleged gift deed as such, which, according to the learned counsel, was necessary to prove the gift deed.