Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Joyce Severine Rego vs Smt Christine Gilbert Carlo on 25 May, 2012

Author: N.Ananda

Bench: N.Ananda

    I i'IIF HIGH (ORI OF KARN\IAKA Al BANGALORF

           DT'EI) TillS filV 25H! DAY OF MAY 2012




               THF iRY\JLL \lRi ricE: \. AA\i)A

                    WRIT PF ITI1ON No 9029jO12

BEFWEEN:

Srnt Joyce Se erine Rego
W/o Flux Vincent Redo
Aged about 52 Years
R/at Galaxy Cottaie
Rego (ompound
Near Kudupu Bridge
Mangalore Taluk.                                                          Pet I tiozi r

(By M/ s Ditarma shree &'cia tes Advoatesj

AND.

SmI .(:liristi (1iiberr Carlo
W    Gill: rt Paul C rl
Ngclab u161\c
R/at Matk a Ro-o
Shi ba 4 (iO.
Ma ial e

           Is p( ,iT]OT      ti   (I   iii   hi         ii       4$) i I (.   r u ir   t

j    (j iafl    lI        uI[1Ii)iiCd         iJ(   r        (1i t d :u ±2 20 ii
 1] oh \       02
                                 2


                          ORDER

The learned trial Judge has rejected the request of accused for sending the disputed signature to the handwriting expert for comparison and opinion. The learned Judge of revisional court has reversed the order of the learned trial Judge.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and I have been taken through the records.

3. It is obvious from the evidence of complainant that she was not present when the cheque was signed by accused. The accused has denied her signature on the cheque. In the clrcnmstances, the request of accused for comparison of signature found In the disputed cheque with the admitted signature of accused by an handwriting expert and the opinion of handwriting expert are necessary for just decision of the case. It Is relevant to state that further analysis of evidence at this stage is likely to cause prejudice to either party on merits of the case.

.%Lx%.

3

4. Therefore. I do not find any grounds to Interfere with the Impugned order. The petition Is accordingly dismissed.

3d!-

JUDGE SNN 4