PRABHU NARAIN SHARMA Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in the instant writ petition is to the order dated 24th March, 2009 as also the order dated 5th December, 2009 rendered by Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Jaipur District Jaipur.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the plaintiffs-respondents no. 2 and 3 filed a suit against the petitioner-defendant for specific performance of the contract in the Court of District Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur, which came to be transferred to the court of Additional District Judge No.2, Jaipur District. It is alleged that the petitioner-defendant executed an agreement in favour of the plaintiff on 12th June, 2006. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner-defendant submitted that there were signatures at two places on document Ex.-1, hence he filed an application imploring that the document Ex.-1 be sent to hand writing expert for obtaining his report. THE learned trial court dismissed the application on the ground that the petitioner-defendant himself had admitted his signatures on the document Ex.-1 in his cross-examination and of-course he had denied those signatures to be his own in cross-examination. It is true that the signatures of the petitioner-defendant are at two places. It was difficult to describe as to which of the signature was forged and which was genuine. THE learned trial court also observed that both the parties had led their evidence and the case was fixed for hearing final arguments. Hence there was no reason to send this document to FSL for obtaining expert's report.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has failed to convince me to take a view contrary to that of the view taken by the learned trial court. Hence, the writ petition being devoid of any substance deserves to be dismissed.