Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 1572 (AP)

Dali Rajamma v. Dali Srinivasa Reddy

2024-12-03

RAVI NATH TILHARI

body2024
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Smt. S.A.V. Ratnam, learned Counsel for the petitioners, appearing through virtual mode. 2. Since all these petitions are inter-related, this Court deems it appropriate to hear these matters together and dispose of the same by way of this common order. 3. The petitioners/plaintiffs filed OS No.1580 of 2016 on the file of the Court of the learned II Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Visakhapatnam, for partition of the suit schedule properties. At the stage of arguments, the petitioners/plaintiffs filed IA No.558 of 2024, seeking to send Ex.B1 Unregistered Will, dated 02.07.2014 to expert for comparison of signatures thereon with the contemporaneous signatures of Dalli Appala Reddy available with Andhra Bank, Pithapuram Colony Branch, Visakhapatnam, as the alleged Will was said to be fabricated by forging the signatures of Dalli Appala Reddy. They also filed IA No.557 of 2024 seeking to summon the Officer, Employees Provident Fund Authority, Visakhapatnam and IA No.556 of 2024 to re-open the matter for filing applications. 4. The learned II Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) has dismissed IA No.558 of 2024 observing that the original unregistered Will, dated 02.07.2014 was filed by the respondents/ defendants in another OS No.290 of 2018, and a certified copy of the said document thereof was filed in OS No.1580 of 2016, and marked as Ex.B1. The genuineness of the signatures could not be made by the expert on the basis of a photocopy. The learned Trial Court placed reliance in Bheri Nageswara Rao v. Mavuri Veerabhadhra Rao, AIR 2006 AP 314 and in Abhay Jain v. State of M.P., 2018 SCC OnLine MP 1839. 5. Consequently, the learned II Additional Civil Judge has also dismissed IA Nos.556 & 557 of 2024. 6. Challenging those orders, the petitioners/plaintiffs filed all the above three revisions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 7. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the signatures could be compared from photocopy. 8. In Bheri's case (supra), this Court at Paragraph Nos.4 & 5 observed as under: "4. An expert would be in a position to render his opinion, only when the original of the document containing the disputed signature is forwarded to him. Further, there can be effective comparison and verification of the signatures, if only another document containing the undisputed signatures of the contemporary period are made available to the expert. An expert would be in a position to render his opinion, only when the original of the document containing the disputed signature is forwarded to him. Further, there can be effective comparison and verification of the signatures, if only another document containing the undisputed signatures of the contemporary period are made available to the expert. In the instant case, respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed Exs.B13 and B15, which are, admittedly, the Xerox copies of General Power of Attorney, dated 21.12.1988 and khararnama, dated 21.12.1988. It is rather incomprehensible that an expert would be able to undertake analysis of the imprint of a signature, on a Xerox copy. 5. The opinion of a hand writing expert involves the analysis of the slant, which a person uses in the matter of putting his signature, and in some cases, the point of time, at which it may have been subscribed. These analyses would become possible only vis-a-vis an original signature; and the signature mark on a Xerox copy of a document can never constitute the basis." 9. In Abhay's case (supra), the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, at Paragraph Nos.28 to 44 held as under : "28. It is not in dispute that in the present case both the experts have taken photographs of disputed signatures/thumb impression from the photocopy of the Will. Photocopy of document itself is neither primary nor secondary evidence. It is not advisable for experts to take photograph of photocopies and base their opinion on such photocopies. Expert should always base his opinion on original documents. When an expert forms his opinion on the basis of photocopies, I feel that the expert has committed mistake and such report cannot be relied upon in absence of any corroborative evidence, which is not available at all in this case. 29. The expert should form opinion on the basis of study of original document. The reason being that the pressure points are analyzed by the hand writing expert for which original are required. In the absence of original documents, the analysis of a questioned document is limited to the features that survive the copying process. This is like to identify a person behind a cloudy window; the basics are there, but details are missing. What we call the "three-dimensionality" of the original document is lost. In the absence of original documents, the analysis of a questioned document is limited to the features that survive the copying process. This is like to identify a person behind a cloudy window; the basics are there, but details are missing. What we call the "three-dimensionality" of the original document is lost. Not to mention that if the copy is a copy of a copy, the details become increasingly difficult to verify. 30. We can highlight some reasons here as to why the level of certainty of an expert opinion is affected by having only copies to analyze. Loss of detail - intricate pen direction 31. Pen direction is a very critical factor in the evaluation of handwriting. Copies make it difficult and sometimes impossible to follow intricate writing movements essential for reaching accurate conclusions. Not only is direction important, but also the pressure of the writing instrument can tell us more about the condition of the writer and the writing surface. Overall loss of detail - beginning and ending strokes 32. Natural writing is frequently demonstrated by the tapered beginning and ending strokes. The copying process can eliminate these tapered strokes and make them appear as blunt or chopped off in an otherwise naturally executed signature. Sometimes, blunt ending and beginning strokes are characteristics of "signatures" produced through simulation (emulation) or tracing process. Loss of detail - evaluation of line quality 33. A photocopy of a genuine signature may show "lumpiness" or lack of smooth, clear-cut strokes, resulting in poor line quality (record of the strokes), when in reality the original document may contain good line quality upon examination. Unexpected visual results 34. If a genuine signature is written under uncommon circumstances, the copying process may make it appear as containing the "tremor of fraud," giving the appearance of poor line quality. With the examination of the original questioned document, it may be possible to determine that there is an explanation for what appeared to be poor line quality in the copy. Hesitations 35. Hesitations, a pause in the writing line, generally cannot be detected in copies. Hesitations are common artifacts of "forged" signatures or can be a habit of the true writer. With only copies for evidence, this significant characteristic cannot be determined. Patching 36. Hesitations 35. Hesitations, a pause in the writing line, generally cannot be detected in copies. Hesitations are common artifacts of "forged" signatures or can be a habit of the true writer. With only copies for evidence, this significant characteristic cannot be determined. Patching 36. Patching is the careful retouching sometimes seen in "forged" signatures as a result of the "forger's" perception that the simulation or tracing needs some mending to pass it off as genuine. It is also seen in some people's natural writing but generally cannot be detected and evaluated in copies. Fraudulent manipulations 37. Evidence of cut-and-paste of a genuine signature from a genuine document onto the questioned document cannot always be detected, especially if the genuine signature was added by using computer software. Tracings 38. Traced signature "guidelines" consisting of pencil, carbon or indentations produced with a stylus which correspond with the outline of the genuine signature cannot be conclusively established via the examination of a copy. Writing Instrument 39. While sometimes it is possible with photocopies to make a preliminary determination as to the type of writing instrument used, a definitive determination cannot be made without the original document. Paper 40. Paper can sometime be dated as to its first date of availability through use of watermarks, but obviously this determination cannot be made based on photocopies. Neither can the document be compared as to any other physical characteristics such as the thickness or colour value of the paper. Indentations 41. Occasionally, "indented writings" can be detected with oblique/side lighting or by using a laboratory device on original documents, revealing key information that could resolve some critical issue. While this technique can be applied to photocopies for other purposes, it will not reveal the indentations that are present in the original document. Measurements 42. Accurate measurements cannot be made on photocopies. As a rule, photocopiers do not precisely reproduce the document being copied. Copies impede the reliability of tests that include measuring lines and spaces to determine alterations or insertions in a document. Three-dimensional v. two-dimensional images 43. Photocopies are two-dimensional representations of original documents, which are three-dimensional. Originals disclose all of the physical and optical features of the printing processes and handwriting features. On the other hand, photocopies are high contrast images which leave out all of the mid-tones present in the original images. 44. Originals are always the best evidence. Three-dimensional v. two-dimensional images 43. Photocopies are two-dimensional representations of original documents, which are three-dimensional. Originals disclose all of the physical and optical features of the printing processes and handwriting features. On the other hand, photocopies are high contrast images which leave out all of the mid-tones present in the original images. 44. Originals are always the best evidence. For a more productive result, both questioned and admitted documents should be in original." 10. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has not placed any judgment, contrary to the law as laid down in aforesaid judgment, on the point in issue. 11. It is settled in law that the comparison of signatures on the disputed document cannot be made if it is not the original, but is the photocopy. 12. I do not find any illegality in the orders under challenge. 13. At this stage, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the liberty may be granted to file an appropriate application before the learned Trial Court for summoning the original unregistered Will, dated 02.07.2014 from the record of OS No.290 of 2018, pending before the concerned Court. 14. It is always open for a party to file an appropriate application before the concerned Court in a suit for appropriate prayer, for which, the liberty is not required to be given by this Court. 15. The civil revision petitions are dismissed 16. No order as to costs. 17. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed.