Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jasvir Singh And Ors vs M/S Hukam Chand Subhash Chander … on 31 October, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA-3777-2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 31.10.2014
Jasvir Singh and others ….. Appellants
Versus
M/s Hukam Chand Subhash Chander Sood and others
…..Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P NAGRATH
Before that the plaintiff-firm examined its own hand-writing expert, namely; Anil Kumar Gupta (PW-2), who compared that signatures of Avtar Singh on different entries with his standard signatures and it was found that the disputed signatures of Avtar Singh marked as Q6 to Q14 and standard signatures of Avtar Singh marked as S1 and S2 are similar in their writing characteristics and have been written by one and the same person.
In order to substantiate their plea they have examined Finger and Handwriting Expert, who while stepping into the witness box as DW-1 submitted her report Ex. DW1/1. She has testified that entries in the bahies of plaintiff are fraudulent one. However, in the cross-examination she has totally shattered the case of defendant no. 3. She has admitted that entries are genuine one. She further adds that age and time of writing or ink cannot be determined by any technique. She has also stated that she did not examine the writing characteristic of the digit of the entry at mark Q-1 to Q-15 in this case. She has admitted to be correct that some of the entries examined by her are genuine according to her report.
Re-touching and alteration or addition can be genuine RISHU KATARIA 2014.11.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document RSA-3777-2011 (O&M) -11-
as well as fraudulent and this depends upon the matter in hand. She has further stated that there is no fraudulent addition or alteration on the entry dated 23.5.1998, 19.8.1998, 15.9.1998, 5.11.1998, 16.11.1998, 30.6.1998 and 5.6.1998. She has also categorically admitted that is there is any addition on the right side, then there must be some addition or alteration on sum total present on the left side in the entries of bahi khata to make the balance correct. There is a firm finding of fact by both the Courts below and the learned counsel for the appellants has not been able to show that either there is misreading of evidence or that the material available with the Courts below was ignored. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is without merit and thus dismissed.