Punjab-Haryana High Court
Charanjit Singh vs Sharanjit Singh on 18 November, 2014
Author: Surinder Gupta
Bench: Surinder Gupta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No. 2287 of 2014 (O&M)
Date of decision : November 18, 2014
Charanjit Singh
... Petitioner
vs.
Sharanjit Singh
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA Present: Mr. Bikramjit Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.
Surinder Gupta, J Heard.
The revision petitioner moved application before Rent Controller to obtain specimen signatures and thumb impression of petitioner-respondent to get it compared with his thumb impression/signatures on the agreement to sell Ex.RW1/C. Before moving application, revision-petitioner was allowed to examine the expert.
Application was contested on the ground that if the relief as claimed by revision petitioner is allowed, landlord-respondent will suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in any terms and great miscarriage of justice will be caused.
The Rent Controller vide order dated 14.3.2014 declined the application on the ground that while seeking permission to examine hand writing expert it was pleaded that tenant-revision petitioner intended to prove that rent note did not bear his signatures.
I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the file. Learned counsel for revision petitioner has argued that in the rent petition, revision petitioner has taken two pleas. Firstly, that he is not a tenant in the demised premises and secondly, that respondent had agreed to sell the demised premises vide agreement Ex.RW1/C. In order to prove the execution of agreement, permission of Court was sought to examine DEEPAK KUMAR 2014.11.27 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Civil Revision No. 2287 of 2014 (O&M) -2- document expert. Specimen signatures of landlord-respondent are required to get his signatures on that agreement compared.
Learned counsel for respondent submits that the admitted signatures of landlord exist in the record i.e. on rent note and also on the pleadings and evidence which can be utilized. The application seeking direction to the respondent to give specimen signature is merely an attempt to delay proceeding in ejectment proceedings which is pending for last more than ten years.
The revision-petitioner intend and has been permitted to examine hand writing expert. To prove the signatures of revision petitioner on the agreement to sell, there could be no impediment for the Rent Controller to order landlord-respondent to give his specimen signatures. The giving of specimen signatures in no manner will cause any irreparable loss to landlord.
The revision petition is allowed. The Rent Controller will grant opportunity to landlord-respondent to give his specimen signatures in court and proceed further in accordance with law.
As ejectment petition is pending for the last more than four years, the Rent Controller is directed to dispose of the petition expeditiously, preferably within six months.
(Surinder Gupta) Judge November 18, 2014 deepak DEEPAK KUMAR 2014.11.27 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document