S. 45/73 Evidence Act Can Be Invoked Only For Admitted Document To Compare Signature Or Handwriting : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has clarified that Section 45 read with Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act can be invoked only in relation to an admitted document for the purpose of comparison of signatures or handwriting.

A bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma made the observation while setting aside a Telangana High Court order that had permitted a defendant to seek forensic examination of a document forming the basis of the plaintiff's case in a long-standing land dispute.

The case arose out of a 50-year-old ownership conflict concerning a parcel of land. The respondent had filed a civil suit in 2015 seeking a declaration of ownership, relying on the outcome of an earlier suit from 1975. The appellant's family disputed the genuineness of a written statement filed in the 1975 suit proceeding, alleging that their grandfather's signature had been forged.

During the trial, the defendants filed an application seeking to send the document for handwriting analysis under Section 45 of the Evidence Act, to compare it with admitted signatures in a written statement filed in another suit of 1974. The plaintiffs opposed the plea, contending that there was nothing to show that the speciment signatures of the 1974 written statement were admitted signatures.

The trial Court dismissed the said application on the ground that the specimen signatures of the grandfather of the defendant are not available. The trial Court also held that the files are not available and the Photostat copies of the written statements are not fit for comparison, that too  when they pertain to nearly fifty (50) years old documents.

However, the Telangana High Court later allowed the request, directing that the document be examined by a forensic expert “in the interests of justice.”

When the matter reached the Supreme Court, the bench underscored the limited scope of Sections 45 and 73, which govern expert opinions and the comparison of handwriting or signatures.

"In a suit for declaration and injunction, it is for the plaintiff to prove his case. Section 45 read with Section 73 of the Act can only be invoked for an admitted document for the purpose of comparison of signatures or handwriting,” the Court observed.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and restored the Trial Court's order rejecting the application for forensic examination.

Cause Title: HUSSAIN BIN AWAZ VERSUS MITTAPALLY VENKATARAMULU & ORS.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1083

Click here to read/download the order

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) Mr. L. Narasimha Reddy, Sr. Adv. Mr. P. Venkat Reddy, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Mr. P.srinivas Reddy, Adv. M/s Venkat Palwai Law Associates, AOR

For Respondent(s) Mr. D. Manohar Rao, Adv. Mr. Hanuman Prasad, Adv. Mr. Varun Punia, AOR