Retna Pandian and Others vs Subramonian

Honourable Mr. Justice G. Rajasuria

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to get set aside the order dated 23.04.2012 passed in I.A.No. 59 of 2012 in O.S.No. 168 of 2006 by the learned First Additional Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil. Heard both sides.

A recapitulation and re''sume'' of facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this Civil Revision Petition would run thus:

2(a). The learned Counsel for the revision petitioners/defendants 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 would put forth and set forth his arguments, which could tersely and briefly be set out thus:

The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for partition. Whereas the revision petitioners filed the written statement contending that already there was a registered partition deed dated 10.06.1983. The left thumb impression of the respondent/plaintiff is also found therein. However, the respondent/plaintiff having a volte face and ''U'' turn and about turn, would dispute and challenge the genuineness of his purported left thumb impression in the said deed. Hence, I.A.No. 59 of 2012 was filed by the revision petitioners seeking expert assistance. However, the lower Court dismissed it as though it was belatedly filed.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of the lower Court, this Civil Revision Petition has been focussed on various grounds.

According to the learned Counsel for the revision petitioners, if the expert analyses the disputed left thumb impression(s), with that of the admitted left thumb impressions of the respondent/plaintiff, then the truth will come out.

The learned Counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, in all fairness, would submit that his client is having no objection for taking the assistance of the expert for the aforesaid purpose.

Hence, I could see considerable force in the submission of the learned Counsel for the revision petitioners that if the expert assistance is taken in this regard, then the lower Court would be in a position to base its judgment on a stronger footing. I also recall and recollect the famous maxim "Every trial is a voyage in which truth is the quest."

At this juncture, the learned Counsel for the respondent/plaintiff would submit that in addition to obtaining the sample left thumb impressions of the plaintiff, the Thumb Impression Register bearing the left thumb impression of the plaintiff might also be summoned in this regard. I could also see considerable force in his submission. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed, setting aside the order dated 23.04.2012 passed in I.A.No. 59 of 2012 in S.No. 168 of 2006 by the learned First Additional Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil and consequently, the I.A.No. 59 of 2012 is allowed. The lower Court shall do well to see that at the first instance, the Thumb Impression Register is summoned from the Registrar of Documents, pertaining to the left thumb impression of the respondent/plaintiff in the registered partition deed dated 10.06.1983 and the respondent/plaintiff shall appear before the Court concerned and furnish his left thumb impressions which shall be taken in the presence of both side Advocates sand thereafter, an Advocate Commissioner shall be appointed with the following mission:

(a) To carry the relevant documents in connection with this case personally in a sealed cover;

(b) and produce the same before the Forensic Expert;

(c) leave it in his custody under his acknowledgement for as many days as the Forensic Expert may require;

(d) collect the record from the Forensic Expert on the day as may be fixed by him;

(e) bring it back and lodge it with the Court.

The Forensic Expert is directed to complete the examination in any event within a period of one week after the depositing of the same by the Advocate Commissioner with him. After getting the report, both the parties shall be given due opportunity to file objections if any to the report of the Expert, whereupon the lower Court has to decide the matter as expeditiously as possible.