1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Writ Petition No.669 of 2010. _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|_______________________________________ 1. The petitioners applied for sending the disputed documents i.e. cheque for opinion of handwriting expert. The hand-writing expert gave report that the material furnished to him was insufficient for the purpose of comparison and, therefore, opinion could not be given. The applicants filed another application calling upon the handwriting expert to explain what were the deficiencies and how the material was found insufficient. The trial Court rejected such application filed at Exh.100. The petitioners are at liberty to seek appointment of another handwriting expert if they so desire. They may call the handwriting expert as a witness to explain what kind of deficiency was noticed by him but indulgence of the trial Court only to seek explanation from the handwriting expert may not be permissible inasmuch as the Court is not intermeddling agency for such purpose. Considering these aspects, no serious defect or patent error is noticed. The petition is dismissed with liberty to adopt appropriate course like appointment of another handwriting expert or to call the earlier handwriting expert as a witness and then seek his explanation. No costs. (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) Dt.04.03.2010. asp/office/wp669.10