1 CR NO. 1083 OF 2010 -.- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. -.- CR NO. 1083 of 2010 Date of Decision:- 18.11.2010 -.- Surinder Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Sudesh Kumar ...Respondent. -.- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- Present:- Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Harit Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent. -.- Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Present petition is filed by the defendant challenging the order dated 1.2.2010 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nakodar, whereby application filed by the defendant for comparison of his signatures on the alleged agreement with his specimen signatures, was rejected. The brief facts of the present case are that respondent-plaintiff filed suit for specific performance of the contract pursuant to the agreement to sell dated 1.7.2003. In the written statement defendant has specifically stated that alleged agreement to sell is not executed by him and is a fabricated document. Defendant, in the affidavit in examination-in-chief, has stated on oath very clearly in paragraph No.2, that alleged agreement to 2 CR NO. 1083 OF 2010 -.- sell does not bear his signatures. Learned trial Court having observed that defendant has not assailed his signatures on agreement either in written statement or during cross-examination of witnesses of plaintiff, had rejected the application. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the records. Observation of the learned trial Court that defendant has not assailed his signatures on the agreement to sell, seems to be wrong in view of the pleadings taken in the written statement, more particularly in paragraphs No. 4 and 5 thereof. Trial Court's observation is further wrong in view of paragraph No.2 of the affidavit filed by the defendant in examination-in-chief. Learned counsel for the plaintiff while placing reliance on the cross-examination of the defendant, has argued that defendant, during the cross-examination, has denied his signatures on the written statement, application seeking permission to examine the disputed signatures with the specimen signatures as well as on the amendment application as also on the Power of Attorney, hence, in view of this, defendant is proved to be making the incorrect statement and as such he should not be permitted to get his signatures compared through Finger Print and Handwriting Expert. What would be the effect of the statement made by the defendant in his cross-examination, is the subject matter, to be appreciated by the trial Court at the time of final decision of the suit. Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the defendant should be granted an opportunity to get his signatures compared, on the alleged agreement to sell, with the specimen 3 CR NO. 1083 OF 2010 -.- signatures which the defendant shall give in the Court, through the Finger Prints and Handwriting Expert. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Alok Singh ) (Judge) November 18, 2010. Saini