Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief to Mokobara in Trademark Case  ||  Delhi HC: Students Shouldn’t be Excluded from Admission because of Untimely Declaration of Results  ||  Madras HC: Nobody Other than the State Can Claim Ownership to Natham Lands  ||  Delhi HC: Larger Bench to Decide Whether Section 149(1)(c) of IT Act Applies Retrospectively  ||  Madras High Court Upholds Regulations Imposing Night Ban on Online Real Money Games  ||  President Promulgates Amendment Ordinance for J&K Reservation Act, 2004  ||  Calcutta High Court Refuses Relief to Law Student in Offensive Video Case  ||  SC: NBE Files Application Seeking Postponement of NEET-PG 2025  ||  Delhi HC Grants ‘Superlative Injunction’ in Favor of Broadcaster Star India  ||  NCLAT: Suspended Management of CD is Prohibited from Deploying the Funds of Corporate Debtor    

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