Judgment-debtor sought sending payment receipts to a forensic handwriting expert under Section 73 Evidence Act during execution. The High Court upheld the trial court's reasoned order declining expert reference and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~14
versus
SURESH SHARMA .....Respondent Through Mr. Ishu Arora, Ms. Parul and Ms. Manisha, Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
ORDER (Oral)
Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.
Signature Not Verified
Page 1 of 3
CM(M) 110/2023
Signed By:MANISHA RAJPUT Signing Da te:2 0.02.2026 11:35:57
submitted that in order to determine the exact amount paid by the judgment-debtor, examination of the said receipts by a handwriting expert is required.
“Taking the assistance of section 73 of Indian Evidence Act, the Court has asked both the JD as well as DH to put their signature on a piece of paper for perusal of the Court. The Court, has compared the signatures of both JD and DH with the admitted signatures which are present on the present execution petition and various affidavits filed by both the parties. The signatures of the JD however are matching with the signatures on the receipt as well as on the signatures made in the presence of the court. The signatures of the DH made before the court prima facie match with the signatures made on the execution petition and the affidavit which are the admitted signatures but are not similar on the face of it with the signature present on the alleged receipts. Moreover, the Court finds it hard to believe that if the payments were continuously coming to the DH. he had no reason to file the execution petition. Hence, the application under section 73 of IE Act seeking directions of the Court for sending the signatures to the FSL is without merit as the court on bare perusal of the handwriting has come to the opinion that the signatures on the receipts are not belonging to the DH. The application is dismissed being frivollous and devoid of merit and the JD is directed to pay a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to the DH. Application is accordingly disposed of.”
Signature Not Verified
Page 2 of 3
Signed By:MANISHA CM(M) 110/2023 RAJPUT Signing Da te:2 0.02.2026 11:35:57
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J
FEBRUARY 19, 2026/ v/ isk
Signature Not Verified
Page 3 of 3
CM(M) 110/2023
Signed By:MANISHA RAJPUT Signing Da te:2 0.02.2026 11:35:57
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the judgment-debtor's application under Section 73 Evidence Act to send receipts for handwriting expert opinion.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Radhey Shyam
Surender Sharma
Rajneesh Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate civil courts.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
