YOGESH KUMHAR Vs. PAPPU LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dtd. 6/1/2021 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge (for brevity, "the learned trial Court") in Case no.23/2015 whereby, an application filed by the petitioner/defendant (for brevity, "the defendant") under Sec. 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for brevity, "the Act of 1872") has been dismissed.

(2.) The relevant facts in brief are that in a suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff (for brevity, "the plaintiff") under Sec. 37 CPC for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,61,860.00, on an application filed by the defendant, he was granted leave to defend. During the course of his evidence, the defendant moved an application under Sec. 45 of the Act of 1872 praying therein that the disputed promissory note be subjected to examination by the handwriting expert as it bears his forged signature in Hindi whereas, he always puts his signature in English. The application has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dtd. 6/1/2021, impugned herein. Assailing the order, learned counsel for the defendant submits that in view of dispute raised by him with regard to the forgery of his signature on the promissory note, it was incumbent upon the learned trial Court to have subjected the same to examination by the handwriting expert. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed, the order dtd. 6/1/2021 be quashed and set aside and the application filed by him under Sec. 45 of the Act of 1872 be allowed.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the learned trial Court has rejected the application filed by the defendant vide order impugned in its judicious discretion which does not warrant any interference of this Court under its supervisory jurisdiction. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the writ petition.