A.V.G. Neelambal and 2 others vs Saroja and 2 others

Ratnam, J.—There is no dispute that as an earlier application taken out by the petitioners, the court below appointed a private handwriting

expert and she had also submitted a report. It is further seen from paragraph 1 of the affidavit filed by the petitioners in I.A. No. 112 of 1990 that

the petitioners have submitted objections to the report submitted by the expert, which has been characterised by the petitioners as a totally wrong

opined given with ulterior motives, and that, according to the petitioners, will justify the appointment of another handwriting expert. The court

below declined to do so, but on the basis of reasoning which is not quite correct. The court below had proceeded to consider the expert opinion

as one of a report submitted by the commissioner and also stated that without scrapping the first report, the second report could not be called for.

That approach of the court below is certainly not correct. Even so, the petitioners cannot be permitted at this stage of the proceedings to seek the

appointment of another expert witness to disprove the opinion given by the first expert. The first expert was appointed at the instance of the

petitioners and on an application taken out by them in that regard and only ending that the report given by the expert is adverse to them, the

petitioner''s are desirous of seeking the appointment of another Expert. It is not in dispute that the trial of the suit had proceeded to the stage of

arguments and at this stage, it is not desirable that the petitioners� request for the appointment of an expert and the submission of his opinion

regarding the genuineness of the signature found in the will should be granted straightaway. The petitioner, however, could not be denied the

opportunity of establishing that the opinion of the first expert is erroneous on some grounds or other and indeed they had also filed their objections

in that regard. Under these circumstances, it would be open to the petitioners to have another expert examined on their behalf as a witness within a

period of six weeks from today, failing which the trial court will proceed to deal with and dispose of the suit from the stage at which it stands now.

The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.