This petition under section 115, C.P.C. Arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs.7,20,000- filed by the respondent against the petitioner during the course of hearing of which on an application made by the respondent/plaintiff the Trial Court on 11-12-1994 directed that the signatures on the disputed document be sent for comparison.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner relying on Ram Narain Sherma v. Emperor (AIR 1932 Lah.
481) has contended that the opinion of the expert could not have been obtained prior to recording of evidence.
3. I regret my inability to agree with the learned counsel. There is nothing in Article 59 of the Qanun- e-Shahadat Order, 1984 which obliges the Court to postpone obtaining Expert's opinion till such time as the evidence has been completed by the parties. Indeed report of the Expert has to form part of evidence and, therefore, has to be obtained before the evidence is concluded According to the learned counsel himself at the time when the application was made by the respondent for comparison of signatures the case was posted for evidence of the plaintiff. There is thus no illegality committed by the Trial Court in allowing the respondent to obtain expert's opinion.
4. The case relied upon by the learned counsel is of no avail to him as what has been held therein is that the report could only be taken into consideration while forming an opinion as to the genuineness of the disputed document after recording evidence. Naturally once report is received and evidence of the Expert is recorded it shall be considered at the time of final decision of the suit alongwith other evidence recorded.
There is no merit in this petition. It is dismissed in limine.