Arun Bhansali, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dt. 07.10.2013 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr.Div.), Barmer, whereby application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 45 of the Evidence Act read with Section 151 CPC seeking direction for expert report has been dismissed. The respondents -plaintiffs during the pendency of the suit filed an application under Sec. 45 of the Evidence Act seeking expert opinion on the thumb impression on the gift deed, which is subject matter of the suit.
(2.) WITH the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the defendant the application was allowed by the trial Court on 05.03.2013 and an opinion dt. 04.05.2013 of one Mr. R.K. Thakur said to be a finger print expert was produced before the trial Court on 31.05.2013. The said Mr. R.K. Thakur opined that the thumb impressions on the gift deed were different from that of the plaintiff which were obtained in the Court on 16.04.2013. An application dt. 26.07.2013 was filed by the petitioner under Sec. 45 of the Evidence Act, inter -alia, indicating several grounds seeking to discredit the report given by said Mr. R.K. Thakur and relying on the averments contained in the plaint and sought appointment of another finger print expert Dr. Iqbal Ahmed Usta. The application was opposed by the plaintiff in the trial Court. After hearing the parties the learned trial Court came to the conclusion that the hand -writing/finger print expert was appointed with the consent of the defendant and the issues which have been raised in the application seeking to discredit the report submitted by the said expert, it would be open for the petitioner to cross -examine the said hand -writing expert if and when he is produced for proving the said report and consequently, dismissed the application filed by the petitioner.
(3.) IT is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that from a bare perusal of the plaint, it is apparent that the plaintiff has admitted thumb impression on the gift deed, however, has taken a plea that the said document was got executed under wrong impression and therefore, the entire action on his part in getting a finger print expert's report denying the signatures is to get out of the said admission in the plaint.;