Court is Expert of Experts: High Court Upholds Right to Rebuttal Evidence in Will Dispute

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld a trial court's decision permitting the plaintiffs to introduce a handwriting expert's testimony in rebuttal during a contentious will dispute. Justice Gurbir Singh emphasized the court’s role in ensuring a fair trial by allowing comprehensive examination of the evidence, highlighting the critical importance of balanced evaluation in cases involving allegations of forgery.

The case centers around a dispute over the legitimacy of a will purportedly executed by Nirmal Singh in favor of his elder son, Diljit Singh Heer. The plaintiffs, heirs of Diljit Singh Heer, assert that the will, dated April 16, 2014, is genuine and bequeaths Singh’s entire estate to Diljit. The defendants, heirs of Nirmal Singh’s other son, Sukhjit Singh, contest the will, claiming it is a forged document fabricated with the aid of marginal witnesses.

Justice Gurbir Singh noted the inherent complexities in handwriting comparison, describing it as a "rudimentary science." He underscored that the court itself must act as the "expert of experts" in evaluating such evidence. The court allowed the plaintiffs to present rebuttal evidence from a handwriting expert to compare disputed signatures, recognizing the necessity of multiple expert opinions to arrive at a just conclusion.

The court dismissed the defendants' argument that the plaintiffs’ request to present a handwriting expert in rebuttal was an attempt to fill gaps in their initial evidence. Citing previous judgments, including Gurpal Singh vs. Gurmej Singh and Jaswinder Singh vs. Rajwant Kaur, the court affirmed the plaintiffs' right to rebut the defendants' handwriting expert’s testimony. Justice Singh emphasized that this approach ensures a balanced and thorough examination of all evidence.

The judgment draws on a series of precedents to justify the decision, including Surjit Singh vs. Jagtar Singh and Avtar Singh vs. Baldev Singh. These cases collectively support the notion that plaintiffs are entitled to rebuttal evidence, particularly when it pertains to critical issues like the authenticity of signatures on a disputed document. The court highlighted that denying the plaintiffs this right would compromise the integrity of the judicial process and hinder the pursuit of truth.

Justice Gurbir Singh remarked, "Since signatures of Nirmal Singh on the Will dated 16.04.2014 were not specifically denied in the written statement, the plaintiffs have every right to examine the handwriting expert to give report regarding the signatures on the Will dated 16.04.2014 with his specimen signatures." He further stated, "The onus to prove that the Will in question was forged and fabricated document was on the defendants. So, the plaintiffs have got right to rebut the said evidence in rebuttal."

The High Court’s decision reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to a fair and exhaustive evaluation of evidence in legal disputes. By allowing the plaintiffs to introduce rebuttal evidence, the judgment ensures that all relevant information is considered, thereby upholding the principles of justice and equity. This ruling is expected to set a significant precedent in future cases involving contested wills and allegations of forgery, emphasizing the critical role of balanced and thorough judicial scrutiny.

Date of Decision: July 01, 2024