Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. In the application, the appellants have alleged that the plaint documents No.1 to 4 are forged and fabricated. We have also perused the plaint documents No.1 to 4 viz., (1) an extract copy of the Resolution of the Board Meeting of the defendant held on 2.12.2001; (2) Demand Promissory Note for Rs.4.50 lakhs, dated 2.1.2002; (3) Demand Promissory Note for Rs.12 lakhs, dated 22.5.2002; (4) Demand Promissory Note for Rs.5 lakhs, dated 10.7.2002, and documents 2 to 4 are Bills of exchange issued by the 1st defendant - Esjaypee Impex Private Limited company signed by the Director. For sending the plaint documents 1 to 4 containing the disputed signatures, the appellants have also filed xerox copies of 5 cheques dated 8.4.2002, 9.4.2002, 14.3.2002, 15.3.2002 and 14.3.2002 drawn on Canara Bank, Chennai issued by the 1st defendant Company signed by the Managing Director. According to the Appellant, those Cheques filed in the Schedule of the application contain the admitted signatures of the 2nd defendant and therefore prayed that the plaint documents 1 to 4 have to be sent to the handwriting expert for comparison with the admitted signatures found in the Bills of Exchange. As rightly pointed out by the learned single Judge, the documents containing the sample signatures are only xerox copies, which will not be of any assistance for the purpose of comparing the disputed signatures in the plaint documents 1 to 4.