Dismissed

Suresh Soni v. State Bank Of India and Anr.

Chhattisgarh HC2 Aug 2013WP227/544/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-bench judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 227. The petitioner challenged an order allowing a respondent to inspect a disputed cheque by an expert. The court held that the lower court committed no illegality and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage; petitioner is at liberty to represent his position at the time of examination of the expert.

Suresh Soni Vs State Bank Of India and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

§
Q»

¶3

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISGARH AT

¶4

BILASPUR W.P. (ART. 227) LEM^‘4 /2o13 g? W "wmw

¶5

PETITIONER (DEFENDANT^No 2)

¶6

L11!

¶7

SURESH Som

¶8

S/ o BHAGWAN DIN SONI, aged about 52 years, R/o Balodabazar, Thana and Tahsil Balodabazar, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

V/S

¶10

RESPONDENTS 1. “k (PLAINTIFF)

¶11

(DEFENDANT^No. 1)

¶12

STATE BANK OF INDIA, BRANCH BALODABAZAR THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER Chandra Mohan Diwedi, State Bank Of India, Balodabazar District Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

SHIV SHANKAR AGARWAL S/o SHYAM SUNDAR AGARWAL Sharma, aged about 54 years, R/o Dashahra Majdan, Balodabazar, Thana 8c Tahsil Balodabazar, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

¶15

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRAITE WRIT

¶16

¶17

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR (Single^{Bench:Hon’bleMr.T.P.Sharma,J)}

¶18

w.P. (227) No.544/2013

¶19

Petitioner Suresh Soni

¶20

Defendant No.2

¶21

¶22

Respondents 1. State Bank of India, Branch Baloda Bazar Plaintiff Defendant No.1 2. Shiv Shankar Agarwal

¶23

Present:

¶24

Mr. Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Respondents not noticed.

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(02.08.2013)

¶27

By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to invoke supervisory jurisdiction and prayed for quashment of the order dated 1‘6‘12012 passed by the 2““ Additionai District Judge, Balodabazar in Civii Suit NoV7-B/2011 whereby application filed on behalf of respondent No.2 for examination of cheque by an expert, allegedly^issued by him, has been allowed.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner^{submitsthatbefore} passing^theorder impugned, opportunity of hearing has not been provided to the present petitioner^{thereforetheCourtbelowhasvioiatedthe} principles^ofnatural justice. He further submits that issuance of cheque by respondent No.2 is not in dispute therefore there is no propriety in^its examination by an expert.

¶29

Undisputedly, the cheque has been issued by the respondent No.2 who has specifically alleged in Para—4 of his written statement relating to some manipulation in the cheque, which is also one of the defences of the respondent No.2. In order to contest the case against the petitioner,^the respondent No.2 has filed the aforesaid appiication for examination of document by an expert, which has been allowed. By passing the order impugned, even without providing opportunity of hearing to the present petitioner,^{theCourtbelowhas} not committed any illegality requiring any interference in exercise of supervisory jurisdictisn.

¶30

Consequently, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed at the admission stage itself. However, the petitioner is at liberty to take the ground or explain his position at the time of examination of the expert or at the time of adducing evidence. No order as to cost.

¶31

sar— 1’.^Sharma Judge

Suresh Soni v. State Bank Of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Soni v. State Bank Of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramgopal Mohta Vs Surjit Singh

Rajjan Prasad Pandey Vs Vijay Bahadur Soni and Ors.

Ramkrishna Vs Smt.Dasoda Bai And Ors.

Gangaram And Ors. Vs Mahetlal Dheevar

Bhupendra and Ors. Vs Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Mahasamund

Dinesh Kumar Gupta Vs Smt.kumari Sharma And Ors.