https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305393 Conflicting handwriting expert opinions on the genuineness of signatures and alleged alterations in a disputed pronote and receipt justified independent forensic examination. Expert evidence on handwriting is relevant under the Evidence Act but is not binding on the court, and where rival reports are diametrically opposite, the court may seek an additional opinion to resolve the impasse. Although the court can compare handwriting under Section 73, it is not a handwriting expert and should not ordinarily decide disputed signatures by casual visual comparison when technical assessment is needed. The request to send the questioned documents to a government forensic laboratory was allowed and the order refusing that examination was set aside. en-us Tue, 29 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Dec 2022 14:40:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305393 Conflicting handwriting expert opinions on the genuineness of signatures and alleged alterations in a disputed pronote and receipt justified independent forensic examination. Expert evidence on handwriting is relevant under the Evidence Act but is not binding on the court, and where rival reports are diametrically opposite, the court may seek an additional opinion to resolve the impasse. Although the court can compare handwriting under Section 73, it is not a handwriting expert and should not ordinarily decide disputed signatures by casual visual comparison when technical assessment is needed. The request to send the questioned documents to a government forensic laboratory was allowed and the order refusing that examination was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 29 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305393