Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2018 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1916 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTProduction of documents under leave of the court - it is alleged that a particular document was not referred to a Forensic Laboratory, for seeking an expert opinion, as regards the age of the ink appearing in the signature of the petitioner - case of the defendant is that he has signed on a blank document, which was tendered as a surety to the plaintiff - HELD THAT:- Reliance placed in the case of VIJAY S/O ACHYUT ASHTIKAR, REKHA W/O VIJAY ASHTIKAR VERSUS VINAYAK S/O ACHYUT ASHTIKAR [2018 (2) TMI 2084 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] where it was held that the technology is now available to consider the age of the ink appearing on a document. If the original copy of the document containing the writing is available, the Nutron Activation Analysis, BABC, Mumbai has the facility to find out the approximate range of the time during which the writings would have been made. The said Institution is a Central Government Organization. This Court, therefore, ruled in favour of referring the document for the purposes of seeking an expert opinion upon the approximate age of the ink. In view of the law that has evolved in the judgments delivered in Vijay Achyut Ashtikar, the Trial Court should have taken a pragmatic view rather than taking a pedantic view in the matter. The endevour of the court is to ensure that the truth surfaces. If the ends of justice are to be met and especially in view of the peculiar facts of this case when the Trial Court was directed to decide the suit afresh, the rejection of Exh.44 would not come in way of the petitioner/ defendant. This petition is partly allowed.
|