$~62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 1885/2025 HAMID KHAN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Javed Ahmad and Ms. Aakriti Aditya, Advocates. versus MEHMOOD SHAH AND ANR .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL O R D E R % 23.07.2026 CM APPL. 46620/2026 1. This is an application filed by the petitioner seeking early hearing of the present matter. 2. None appears on behalf of the respondents despite advance notice. 3. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. 4. The application stands disposed of. CM(M) 1885/2025 5. The petitioner assails the impugned order dated 08.08.2025, passed by the learned ASCJ, North-East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in CS No. 81/2015, titled “Hamid Khan v. Mehmood Shah & Anr.”, whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed petitioner’s application dated 07.08.2025, seeking recall of the handwriting & fingerprint expert to determine the validity of the respondent no. 2’s signature against the title documents This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/07/2026 at 15:05:36 relevant to the suit. 6. The underlying civil suit, bearing CS No. 81/2015, was instituted on 29.04.2015 by the petitioner against the respondents, for possession, declaration, permanent injunction and damages/mesne profits arising out of the suit property bearing No. A-23, Gali No. 16, Chauhan Banger, Seelampur, Delhi – 110053, admeasuring 41 sq. yrds. 7. During course of the proceedings, the petitioner filed an application dated 27.04.2023 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking permission to file additional list of witnesses, wherein the petitioner categorically requested that the signature/fingerprint witness i.e., Witness No. 6, be called for inspection of respondent no. 2’ signatures to verify the validity of suit documents. 8. The learned Trial Court vide order dated 25.01.2024, decided petitioner’s application dated 27.04.2023, and made a specific observation on qua fingerprint/handwriting witness, holding that the application to this extent is kept in abeyance, to be considered at the appropriate stage. 9. Thereafter, on 07.08.2025, the petitioner preferred an application under Sections 39 and 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1982 specifically praying that the fingerprint expert be permitted to submit an opinion report after obtaining the signatures of respondent no. 2, from the documents filed by her in the suit for comparison against the title documents i.e., General Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sell, Will Deed, and Receipt, executed on 15.07.2002. 10. By the impugned order dated 08.08.2025, the learned Trial Court dismissed the aforesaid application dated 07.08.2025, holding that the petitioner had remained silent since the framing of issues in the suit on This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/07/2026 at 15:05:36 06.08.2015, and had chosen to pursue the present application only at this belated stage with a view to further delaying the suit. By the same order, the learned Trial Court closed the plaintiff's evidence and adjourned the matter for recording of defendant's evidence. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that the petitioner had already sought a similar prayer regarding the fingerprint expert vide application dated 27.04.2023. It is submitted that by order dated 25.01.2024, the learned Trial Court had specifically put the fingerprint/ handwriting expert witness’s examination, in abeyance, intended to be considered at an appropriate stage. The learned Trial Court’s finding that this request was belated is, therefore, erroneous on the face of the record. 12. Learned counsel further submits that the impugned order has the adverse effect of foreclosing the petitioner's substantial right to lead evidence on the most crucial aspect of his case, namely, the proving of the transfer of respondent no. 2's half share by way of documents dated 15.07.2002. 13. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. 14. This Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner's prayer regarding examination of the fingerprint/handwriting expert witness, warrants consideration, inasmuch as the impugned order's finding that the application dated 07.08.2025 was filed belatedly, is misconceived given that petitioner’s similar request vide application dated 27.04.2023 was kept in abeyance by the learned Trial Court, to be considered at a subsequent appropriate stage. 15. In view thereof, the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 passed by the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/07/2026 at 15:05:36 learned Trial Court in the civil suit bearing CS No. 81/2015 is hereby, set aside, and one final opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner to lead evidence of fingerprint/handwriting expert witness, so as to safeguard the substantial rights of the petitioner. 16. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the learned Trial Court is directed to fix a date at the earliest, and grant the petitioner/plaintiff a final opportunity to lead evidence in an effective manner. 17. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinions on the merits of this case. 18. The date already fixed i.e., 26.11.2026, stands cancelled. AJAY DIGPAUL, J JULY 23, 2026 MK/os This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/07/2026 at 15:05:36