NAVAL KISHORE JOURNALIST Vs. DHANRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dt. 13.03.2003 (Annex. 3) whereby the application preferred by the petitioner for sending the documents to the handwriting expert for investigation has been rejected. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent -plaintiff Dhanraj filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 60,395/ - against the petitioner -defendant. The petitioner -defendant denied the allegations made in the plaint by filing written statement. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned trial Court framed as many as three issues. The evidence of the respondent -plaintiff was recorded and closed on 26.07.2001.

(2.) ON 23.07.2002, the petitioner moved an application under Order 7 Rule 14 C.P.C. and prayed that he got compared his signature with the signature put on the alleged promissory note by one hand -writing expert namely Sri Ramesh Thakur at Jodhpur and the report of the Handwriting Expert may be taken on record. The learned trial Court vide order dt. 21.01.2003 has allowed the said application preferred by the petitioner and ordered for taking the report of Handwriting Expert on record. On 19.02.2003 again the petitioner has preferred another application with the prayer that the original promissory note may be sent to the handwriting expert for detail investigation at the expense of the petitioner.

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the order dt. 13.03.2003, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.