LAWS(JHAR)-2016-12-44

HABIB ANSARI Vs. JASIM ANSARI

Decided On December 07, 2016
Habib Ansari Appellant
V/S
Jasim Ansari Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The instant writ petition is the forth consecutive writ petition on the question of examination of Left Thumb Impression (LTI) of one Sheikh Rahmat who is said to have executed 3 sale deeds dated 24.8.1936(Ext.B), 20.2.1970 and 14.9.1979(Ext.2). As a matter of fact the Plaintiffs requested the learned Court of Sub Judge-II, Hazaribag in Title Suit No. 93 of 1996 to allow them to summon the Thumb Impression register from the Sub Registrar, Gola and get the sale deed no. 1204 dated 20.2.1970 compared to ascertain whether the thumb impression of the said Rahmat Ali appearing in sale deed no. 1065 dated 24.8.1936(Ext.B) is genuine or not. Though the prayer was initially refused by the learned Court below by order dated 24.3.2011 but this Court in W.P.C. No. 2014 of 2011 vide judgment dated 21.12.2011(Annexure-1) allowed the prayer in substance with a direction to the Trial Court to summon the Sub Registrar, Gola along with register of LTI and enable the petitioner to lead its evidence as well as the Defendants to offer evidence in rebuttal. Learned Sub Judge was however directed to conclude the exercise within a period of 6 months.

(3.) The comparison of the two documents was carried out thereafter. The Defendants who are the Respondents herein however chose to assail the order dated 5.10.2012 passed by the learned Court below refusing it to undertake the exercise of examination of LTI by expert again by taking photograph of the LTI of the said Rahmat Ali on the sale deed dated 24.8.1936 and 20.2.1970. However, the Writ Court in the challenge thereto in W.P.C. No. 6583 of 2012 vide order dated 20.3.2013(Annexure-5) allowed one last opportunity to the Defendants to adduce evidence of rebuttal. Again an attempt was made by the Defendants / Respondent herein to take photograph of the LTI of Rahmat Ali from sale deed dated 24.8.1936 and sale deed dated 20.2.1970 for the purpose of expert opinion. On the request being declined vide order dated 28.11.2013, they again approached this Court in W.P.C. No. 7674 of 2013. By the order dated 25.2.2014(Annexure-9) the writ petition was disposed of. The order is quoted in extenso as it has a bearing on the present controversy:-