Dismissed

Balwan Singh v. Inder Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Jan 2012CR/209/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil revision, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging an order that refused an application for forensic analysis of ink age, writing age, and revenue stamp issuance dates on a pronote and receipt.

What did the court decide?

None. The revision petition for recalling the order dismissing the forensic analysis application was dismissed.

Balwan Singh Vs Inder Singh — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CR No.209 of 2012

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CIVIL REVISION NO.209 OF 2012 DATE OF DECISION: JANUARY 13, 2012

Balwan Singh

.... Petitioner

Versus

Inder Singh

.... Respondent

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL.

¶11

¶12

PRESENT: Mr. V. S. Punia, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

¶14

L.N. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

¶15

Defendant Balwan Singh has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to assail order dated 30.09.2011 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaithal thereby dismissing defendant's application Annexure P-2 for sending the pronote and receipt dated 12.03.2006 to Security Press, Nasik or some other forensic laboratory to determine the age of ink used in alleged thumb impressions of the defendant thereon and also age of the writing of the pronote and the age of revenue stamps affixed thereon.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the

¶17

case file.

¶18

At the outset, it has to be noticed that the impugned order is very cryptic. Learned Presiding Officer, who passed this order, is advised to pass

¶19

CR No.209 of 2012

¶20

-2-

¶21

proper speaking orders.

¶22

It is alleged by defendant-petitioner in application Annexure P-2 that he was customer at the shop of M/s. Maan Trading Company during the period from 1996 to June, 2005 and during this period, the pronote and receipt were got thumb marked from the defendant whereas the pronote and receipt purport to be dated 12.03.2006.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the version made in the application. However, the application cannot be accepted. Even if it be assumed for the sake of argument that the revenue stamps affixed on pronote and receipt in question were issued during the period from 1996 to 2005 as alleged by the defendant-petitioner, even then the said revenue stamps could validly be used on impugned pronote and receipt executed on 12.03.2006. Consequently no purpose, whatsoever, would be served by getting report from Security Press, Nasik regarding year of issue of the said revenue stamps.

¶24

As regards age of ink of alleged thumb impressions of the defendant and age of writing of pronote-cum-receipt, counsel for the petitioner-defendant is unable to tell if there is any laboratory or there is any scientific test which can determine age of ink or writing.

¶25

For the reasons aforesaid, I find no merit in the instant revision petition, which is is accordingly dismissed in limine.

¶26

(L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE

¶27

13.01.2012 'raj'

Balwan Singh v. Inder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwan Singh v. Inder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritu Vohra Vs Sanjeev Vohra

Baljit Singh Vs Gulab Singh and Ors.

Rachpal Singh Vs Harbans Singh etc.

Zora Singh Vs Harpreet Singh

Municipal Council Rewari Vs Munna Lal and Ors.

M/S Escort Finance Limited Vs Shyam Bihari Garg