IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7729 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: January 17, 2011 Naveen .. Petitioner Vs. Dharambir and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate for the petitioner. A.N. Jindal, J (Oral) The petitioner has invoked the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 9.9.2010 passed by the trial court dismissing the application of the petitioner for taking the thumb impressions of the petitioner. Having gone through the impugned order, the same does not effect the substantial rights of the parties as thumb impressions of the petitioner- plaintiff already on the power of attorney, plaint and affidavit could be treated as standard/specimen thumb impressions for comparison with the disputed thumb impressions for the following reasons :- i) The thumb impressions/ signatures would be presumed to have been made by the plaintiff(s) unless proved otherwise. ii) The defendant (s) did not dispute the genuineness of those thumb impressions/ signatures in the written statement filed by him. iii) There is no opinion of the expert that those thumb impressions/ signatures are not legible and insufficient for comparison. Civil Revision No. 7729 of 2010 (O&M) -2- As such the plaintiff cannot be allowed to multiply the thumb impressions by further giving the same under the orders of the court. No grounds to interfere. Dismissed. January 17, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge