Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

TEK CHAND & ORS versus JASWANT SINGH

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


TEK CHAND & Ors v. JASWANT SINGH - CR-4222-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 199 (19 January 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

****

C.R. No.4222 of 2005

Date of Decision: 10.1.2006

Tek Chand and others

Vs.

Jaswant Singh

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
Present:- Shri O.P. Sharma, Advocate

for the petitioner.

****

Vide order under challenge, application of the petitioner to get sample thumb impression of the defendant- respondent to compare the same with alleged thumb impression on the sale deed in dispute was dismissed.

While issuing notice of motion on 13.9.2005, following contention of counsel for petitioner was noticed by this Court:- "Counsel contends that the petitioners-plaintiffs moved an application on 27.8.2001, with a prayer that the defendant- respondent be asked to give his specimen thumb impression, for comparison. Evidence of the petitioners was closed on 22-8-2003, without deciding that application. Now said application has been dismissed by the trial court, by stating that the petitioners' evidence has already been closed, vide order referred to above." C.R. No.4222 of 2005 [2]

Despite service, none has put in appearance to oppose this Civil Revision. It is evident from the order under challenge that the petitioner had moved this application on 31.8.2001, i.e., before closing his evidence on 22.8.2003, may be due to some inadvertence application was not decided by the trial Court. Now merely because evidence of the petitioner has been closed on 22.8.2003,this application cannot be treated as an application for leading additional evidence. Furthermore while passing order under challenge, the trial Court has not taken note of the provisions of order 18 Rule 16A of CPC.

It is apparent from the record that from the very beginning petitioner was interested, in getting the thumb impression of the respondent compared with his thumb impression on the sale deed in dispute. It is a fit case where he can be allowed to do so. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed. Order under challenge is set aside. Application of the petitioners stands allowed. Trial Court is directed to give opportunity to the petitioners to get sample thumb impression of the respondent for the purpose of comparison with his alleged thumb impression on the sale deed and further to give an opportunity to the petitioner to produce an Expert to report in that regard.

January 10, 2006 ( JASBIR SINGH )

renu JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.