[ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITIONNO. 3564 OF 2008 M/S. VITTHAL LALJI MEHTA AND SONS, THROUGH PARTNER SHRI VITHAL LALJI MEHTA ... PETITIONERS. VS. NITIN SADANAND KHANVILKAR ... RESPONDENT. LMR. SUDHIR PRABHU FOR THEPETITIONERS. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.A.Sayed, J. : A.A.Sayed, J. : A.A.Sayed, J. DATE DATE DATE : June 9, 2008. : June 9, 2008. : June 9, 2008. P.C. 1. The Suit before the Trial Court is part-heard. The respondent who is the defendant in the Suit, in his cross-examination has denied his signature to a document at Exh.14/1 and therefore an application has been made by the petitioner, who is the plaintiff in the suit to send the said document to the handwriting expert, which application came to be rejected by the Trial Court. Hence, the above writ petition. 2. The Trial Court in the impugned order has [ 2 ] observed that the application has been filed at belated stage when the defendant is under cross-examination Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with comparison of the signatures, writing or Seal, which reads thus :- "73. 73. 73. Comparison of signature, writing or seal Comparison of signature, writing or seal Comparison of signature, writing or seal with with with others admitted or proved.- others admitted or proved.- others admitted or proved.- In order to ascertain whether a signature, writing or seal is that of the person by whom it purports to have been written or made, any signature, writing, or seal admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court to have been written or made by that person may be compared with the one which is to be proved, although that signature, writing, or seal has not been produced or proved for any other purpose. The Court may direct any person present in Court to write any words or figures for the purpose of enabling the court to compare the words or figures so written with any words or figures alleged to have been written by such person." Thus plain reading of the aforesaid provision makes it clear that the court is empowered to compare signature, writing or seal. [ 3 ] 3. Under the circumstances I am of the view that the impugned order of Trial Court cannot be faulted and does not warrant any interference. It will be open for the Trial Court to compare the signature of the respondent which is on written statement, with the document in question, as per the provisions of Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, in arriving at its findings. 3. With these observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. ..... [A.A.Sayed, [A.A.Sayed, [A.A.Sayed, J.] J.] J.]