Court allows scientific examination of contested Will without removing lamination cover

The Court upheld the trial Court's decision to allow the scientific examination of the contested document, an alleged Will dated 06/11/1991. The examination could proceed without removing the lamination cover, following the expert's proposed method. Both parties were granted the opportunity to challenge the expert's report and discuss the determination of the ink's age after receiving the findings. The Court emphasized the importance of the expert's report in resolving the dispute and directed the trial Court to proceed with the examination based on the expert's method, ensuring transparency and fairness in the process.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to orders below Exhibit-98 and 108 for scientific examination of alleged Will dated 06/11/1991.

Analysis:
The petitioners challenged the orders passed by the trial Court allowing the scientific examination of the alleged Will dated 06/11/1991. The first order permitted the examination of the document, while the subsequent order noted that the document could not be examined without removing the lamination. The trial Court directed physical verification and the custody of the document to be given to an expert for examination. The petitioners argued that no scientific method was available to determine the age of the ink on the document, raising concerns about potential tampering and delay tactics. They cited legal precedents to support their position.

The respondent, on the other hand, supported the trial Court's decision, stating that the examination was necessary to determine the age of the ink on the contested document. The respondent emphasized that the expert's opinion could be challenged, and the examination could proceed without removing the lamination cover.

The Court examined the provisions of Order XXVI Rule 10A of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows the Court to direct scientific examination of relevant documents. Considering the contested Will as the focal point of the dispute, the Court acknowledged the concerns raised by the petitioners regarding the lamination cover potentially affecting the document. The Court noted the expert's assurance that the examination could be conducted without removing the lamination, with both parties or their representatives present.

Ultimately, the Court found that with proper care, the scientific examination of the laminated document could proceed as per the expert's proposed method. The Court emphasized the importance of the expert's report in determining the age of the ink on the document, acknowledging the differing views of the parties on the feasibility of such determination. The Court directed the trial Court to proceed with the examination based on the expert's method, allowing both parties to raise objections and evaluate the expert's report before determining the age of the ink.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petition, upholding the trial Court's decision to allow the scientific examination of the contested document. The parties were granted the opportunity to challenge the expert's report and further discuss the determination of the age of the ink on the Will after receiving the expert's findings.

---