HARBANS KAUR Vs. SOHAN SINGH & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the trial Court dated September 19, 1989, whereby the application filed by the plaintiffs for comparison of their signatures/thumb impressions with their signatures/thumb -impressions on the sale deed which is under challenge, was declined.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit for possession alleging that the sale deed said to have been executed on their behalf of in favour of the defendants was a forged one. Earlier one of the plaintiffs appeared in the witness -box and denied her signatures/thumb -impression. After the parties had closed their evidence, the plaintiffs moved an application that they may be allowed to compare their signatures/thumb -impressions with the disputed signatures on the alleged sale deed which prayer has been declined by the impugned order.

(3.) The learned counsel for the plaintiffs petitioners submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it was a fit case where additional evidence should have been allowed on payment of costs, if any. According to the learned counsel, since the controversy between the parties is as to whether the signatures/thumb -impressions on the alleged scale deed are forged or not, it could only be decided effectively by comparison which evidence according to the learned counsel could not be produced earlier for want of proper guidance by the local counsels.