Calcutta HC Disqualifies Politician Mukul Roy from Assembly under Anti-Defection Law  ||  Supreme Court Bans Mining in and Around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries  ||  Supreme Court Terms Delay in Framing Charges for 4 Years in Maharashtra Case ‘Shocking’  ||  Kerala High Court: Widow’s Remarriage No Bar to Compassionate Appointment  ||  Delhi HC: Child Care Leave Not Absolute but Cannot Be Denied Arbitrarily  ||  Bombay HC: Furnace Oil Not Part of ‘Plant & Machinery’, No Complete Sales Tax Set-Off  ||  MP HC: Injury Not Required to Prove Attempt to Murder  ||  Supreme Court: Tenant Must Pay Rent Despite Appeal Against Fixation Order Without Stay  ||  Supreme Court: Counterclaim under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC Allowed Only Against Plaintiff  ||  SC: Externally Procured Parts Given For Assembly, Not Used in Manufacture, Not Liable to Excise Duty    

Koya Lalitha Kumari and Ors. v. Polina Nageswara Rao and Ors. - (High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for Telangana and Andhra Pradesh) (10 Apr 2015)

Document proved in Court as executed by a party does not require handwriting expert opinion

MANU/AP/0400/2015

Law of Evidence

Once a document is proved in the Court to have been executed, or a signature appended is proved to have been truly signed by the party concerned, it is not mandatory to obtain an opinion from a handwriting expert. The High Court noted that since the Petitioner was accused of changing the way in which she affixed her signature, nothing would be gained by the Court securing her signature and comparing it with the fraudulent ones found. It urged that courts must form their own independent opinions, after giving appropriate weight to the opinion of an expert.

Relevant : Budumuru Vijayanandh vs. Potnuru Bhagyalakshmi MANU/AP/0449/2004 The State of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu Oghad and Ors. MANU/SC/0134/1961

Tags : SIGNATURE   EXPERT   OPINION   MANDATORY   EVIDENCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved