- (1.) THIS application is at the instance of the defendant no.1 and is directed against the Order No.69 dated June 1, 2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Bolpur in Title Suit No.89 of 2010 thereby allowing an application for appointment of a handwriting expert for comparison of the fingerprints of the defendant no.2 in the disputed deed with the admitted ones.
(2.) IT is unfortunate to state that a mother had to file a suit against her two sons, i.e., defendant no.1 and 2 contending, inter alia, that she had been cheated by the defendant no.1, and that fraud and forgery had been practised upon her for the execution of a deed of gift, purported to have been executed by her and attested by the defendant no.2, as described in the schedule to the plaint. When she enquired the defendant no.2 about the deed, he pleaded ignorance about the deed of gift, while the defendant no.1 has contended that the deed had been duly executed by the plaintiff and attested by the defendant no.2. Under the circumstances, the plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration, injunction and other reliefs and the defendant no.1 is contesting the said suit.
(3.) THE defendant no.2 did not contest the said suit, but, when he was called as a witness on behalf of the plaintiff, he had deposed as plaintiff's witness No.2 stating that he had no knowledge about the execution of the deed and that, he had never put any L.T.I.s or signatures appearing in the deed of gift as mentioned in the schedule Ka of the plaint. Under such circumstances, the suit proceed in accordance with law and at the stage of the examination of the defendant's witness, the plaintiff prayed for appointment of a handwriting expert for comparison of the signatures and L.T.I.s of the defendant no.2 to be taken with the alleged signatures and the L.T.I.s on the disputed deed. That application was allowed by the impugned order. Being aggrieved, this application has been preferred.;