AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
11 paragraphs · 206 wordsSanjay K. Agrawal, J
The petitioner's application under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for brevity, 'Act') has been rejected by the impugned order dated
06.11.2012 (Annexure - P/1) against which this writ petition has been preferred.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in law and deserves to be set aside.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order with utmost circumspection.
The trial Court has not assigned any reasons except holding that the subjected documents are not required to be examined by the hand-writing
expert and as such, the trial Court has committed legal error in rejecting the petitioner's application. The impugned order is hereby set aside. The trial
Court is directed to consider the petitioner's application under Section 45 of the Act afresh and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order
expeditiously, preferably within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the trial Court for needful and compliance.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).