Delhi High Court - Orders
Ramesh Chander Kalra vs Om Prakash Arora on 5 August, 2022
$~23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 455/2019 & I.A. No. 12493/2022
RAMESH CHANDER KALRA ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Priyank Khel, Advocate.
(M): 9718800100
versus
OM PRAKASH ARORA ..... Defendant
Through: Mr. Sumit Gahlawat with
Mr. TS Thakran and
Mr. Bikram Shah, Advocates.
(M): 9717777388
Email:[email protected]
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
ORDER
% 05.08.2022 I.A. No. 12493/2022 (Application under Section 151 CPC read with Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act seeking directions for appointment of handwriting expert)
1. This is an application under Section 151 CPC read with Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act seeking directions for appointment of a handwriting expert.
2. It is the case of the plaintiff that the present suit has been filed in the nature of Suit for Specific Performance qua agreement to sell dated 26.09.2015 and extension agreement dated 31.08.2018 entered between the plaintiff and the defendant.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PREETI Signing Date:08.08.2022 11:03:343. It is submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that the defendant has refused to acknowledge the execution of the above mentioned agreement to sell and the extension agreement by way of the written statement filed on behalf of the defendant.
4. Further, as per the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff, the defendant has given contradictory statements which is contradictable from the letter dated 24.08.2019 written by the defendant to the plaintiff.
5. Further, it is the case of the plaintiff that during the pendency of the present suit, the defendant has filed a private expert report dated 21.02.2020 by one Mr. Deepak Jain. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the said private expert report dated 21.02.2020 has been taken on record by this Court only recently vide order dated 22.07.2022.
6. Thus, the present application has been necessitated since as per the plaintiff, the expert opinion filed by the defendant is not trustworthy and has been filed by a private expert, who as per the plaintiff is an interested party.
7. Thus, by way of the present application, the plaintiff prays that Director FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory), Delhi be directed to get the disputed signatures in the agreement to sell dated 26.09.2015 and its extension agreement dated 31.08.2018, examined by an expert.
8. Issue notice.
9. Notice is accepted by learned counsel for the defendant. He submits that he would like to file reply to the present application.
10. Let reply be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PREETI Signing Date:08.08.2022 11:03:34 be filed within one week thereafter.
11. Re-notify the captioned application on the date already fixed i.e. 27.09.2022.
MINI PUSHKARNA, J AUGUST 5, 2022 c Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PREETI Signing Date:08.08.2022 11:03:34