Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurdeep Singh And Another vs Sohan Lal on 12 November, 2013
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CR No. 6821 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of Decision: November 12, 2013.
Gurdeep Singh and another
...Petitioners
Versus
Sohan Lal
...Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
Present: Mr. Hardeep Singh, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
K. KANNAN, J. (Oral)
The revision is against the order of the trial court rejecting a plea for despatch of the promissory note containing a revenue stamp to assess the date of the issue of stamp at Press at Nasik. Such a prayer would be justified in a case where the defendant has a definite contention to make that the signatures found on the document were taken subsequent to the year when the document is purported to have been executed. Then the ascertainment of the year of issue of stamp will obtain significance. When the defendants have taken a plea that the signatures contained in the promissory note is forgery and their father had never signed the same, a mere despatch of the revenue stamp would serve no purpose. It will only amount to fishing out an information about the year of issue which could be of no assistance to court. The court has observed while dismissing the application that there is not even a specific defence about when this document could have been written.
I do not find any error in the order or any prejudice is likely by the rejection of the plaint for interference in revision. The revision petition is dismissed.
November 12, 2013 (K.KANNAN)
prem JUDGE
Singh Prem
2013.11.14 17:18
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh