Writ Petition (GM-FC) No. 9143 of 2024 under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution (High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru; Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur; decided 12.03.2025) by the husband-defendant (through GPA holder) challenging the order dated 06.03.2024 of the I Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, D.K. Mangaluru, rejecting IA No.7 in O.S. No.35/2022 - an application under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act r/w Section 151 of CPC to send Ex.D7 (the wife's alleged Khula request letter annexing a Khulanama bearing no party's signature, produced and marked by the husband) for handwriting and thumb impression expert opinion. The wife's suit under Section 26 read with Order VII Rules 1 to 6 CPC with Section 2(ii)(viii)(a),(d) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 seeks dissolution of marriage (pleaded inter alia on cruelty) with consequential reliefs; her case is not founded on the Khulanama, and the framed issues contained none requiring the wife to prove Khula, an additional issue placing on the defendant the burden of proving she initiated Khula. Held: Ex.D7 is irrelevant for deciding the case; referring it for expert comparison of signatures/thumb impressions is out of question. Though the Family Court's assigned grounds (likelihood of leak of the subject matter; protraction) may not be legally sustainable, the High Court found no good ground or cogent reason to disagree with the rejection. Petition dismissed; IA No.1 does not survive; Family Court directed to dispose of the 2022 suit expeditiously. The two precedents cited by counsel (2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 559; Gulam Ghouse, 2007 (3) A.P.L.J. 6 (HC)) were merely referred to and not adopted by this Court.
