CHARANJIT KAUR Vs. HARDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the learned trial Court dated 02.03.2019, dismissing her application seeking that the revenue stamps affixed on the pronote relied upon by the respondent-plaintiff, and the receipt in respect of the money alleged to have been received by the petitionerdefendant on the strength of that pronote from the respondent-plaintiff, be both got verified from the Government Press at Nasik.

(2.) As per the petitioner, the revenue stamps as were affixed on the pronote and the receipts, were not in existence at the time when the pronote is alleged to have been got thumb marked from her by the respondent, (to the effect that he had lent her a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/-), the said date shown on the pronote being 24.05.2014.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner points to paragraph 1 of her written statement on the merits of the contention raised in the plaint (copy Annexure P-2), wherein it has been contended that the brother of the respondent-plaintiff often used to come to the house of the petitioner to ask about the well being of her husband, Daljit Singh, who it is stated that had left the house for some unknown place. It is also stated in the written statement, that it could be possible that on one of those visits, the plaintiff and Jagdev Singh (shown to be a 'Numberdar' in the written statement), may have obtained the signatures/thumb impression of the defendant on some blank papers, "on the pretext of searching for her husband."