IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24/03/2005
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE T.V.MASILAMANI
C.R.P. No.1100 of 2004
and
CMP.No.10872 of 2004
S.N.Vijayakumar ... Petitioner
-Vs-
S.R.Velusamy ... Respondent
Civil Revision Petition filed against the order and decreetal order
passed in I.A.No.1336 of 2003 in O.S.No.292 of 1999 dated 17.12.2003 on the
file of the Sub Court, Dharapuram.
!For petitioner : Mr.A.K.Sridharan
^For Respondent : Mr.S.Soundar
:O R D E R
The revision petitioner is the defendant who failed before the trial
Court in I.A.No.292 of 1999 to obtain an order to send the disputed document
to the Handwriting Expert for comparison of the signatures and to submit a
report. He has come forward with this petition challenging the legality of
the said order in the Interlocutory Application dated 07.12.2003.
2. Heard both sides. The only point for consideration is whether the
trial Court has to exercise its power under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence
Act to compare the signature in the disputed document with that of the
signatures in the admitted documents before ever the document is sent to the
hand writing expert for comparison.
3. The provision under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act reads as
follows:
“73.Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or
proved:- In order to ascertain whether a signature, writing or seal is that of
the person by whom it purports to have been written or made, any signature,
writing, or seal admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court to have
been written or made by that person may be compared with the one which is to
be proved, although that signature, writing, or seal has not been produced or
proved for any other purpose.
The Court may direct any person present in Court to write any words or
figures for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the words or figures
so written by such person.”
4. Thus it is clear that the said provision of law gives ample power
to the trial Court to compare the signature in the disputed document and the
admitted signatures of the revision petitioner and then come to an independent
conclusion based on such comparison. If in any event, the trial Court finds
it difficult to arrive at any definite conclusion even after such comparison,
it is open to either of the parties to take the document to a hand writing
expert for comparison and offering his opinion on this aspect of the matter.
Hence this Court is of the considered view that the trial Court may be
suitably directed to adopt such course as stated above and dispose of the suit
at an early date.
5. Thus the Civil Revision Petition is ordered as here under:
i) The trial Court is directed to compare the disputed signature of
the revision petitioner with that of the admitted signatures to arrive at the
right conclusion. If in any event, the trial Court is unable to reach any
definite conclusion after comparison of such signatures of the revision
petitioner and the signature in dispute, a suitable direction may be given to
the revision petitioner/defendant to take the document to the forensic
laboratory for comparison by a hand writing expert in order to obtain the
expert opinion.
ii) The trial Court is also directed to dispose of the suit within
three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.
6. In the result, the civil revision petition is ordered as per the
above directions. Consequently, connected CMP is closed. However, there will
be no order as to costs.
ksr
Index:Yes
Internet:yes
To
Sub Court, Dharapuram.