[2026:RJ-JP:16820] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1573/2026 Kailash Chand Verma S/o Shri Jawhar Lal Ji Verma, Aged About 73 Years, R/o 6/239 17/54 37/285, Sukhvilla, Mundadi Moholla, Ajmer. Current R/o 628, Jawhar Kunj, Haribhau Upadhyay Nagar Extension, Ajmer. ----Petitioner/Plaintiff Versus Shri Deepak Verma S/o Shri Kailash Chand Verma, Aged About 41 Years, R/o C-197, Marfat Akram Kha, Haribhau Upadhyay Nagar, Main Pushkar Road, Ajmer. ----Respondent/Defendant For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Pranjal Mundhra for Mr. Veyankatesh Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr. Navdeep Singh Ms. Bhuwaneshwari Ms. Karishma Pareek HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Judgment / Order 21/04/2026 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 06.01.2026, passed by learned Civil Judge cum Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer City (West), Ajmer, whereby the application filed by the plaintiff-petitioner under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC has been dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application was filed to bring on record the report of an expert regarding the signatures, in order to contradict the report of the FSL which was filed by the defendant. She submits that the FSL report was tendered during the cross-examination of the plaintiff. Therefore, there was no occasion for the plaintiff to place such a [2026:RJ-JP:16820] (2 of 3) [CW-1573/2026] document on record prior thereto. She further submits that when the FSL report was tendered in cross-examination, the plaintiff, in order to rebut the same, filed an expert opinion regarding the signatures. Therefore, she submits that her right to rebut the FSL report could not have been declined by the learned Trial Court. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that immediately after the tendering of the FSL report, the plaintiff ought to have filed the application for rebutting the same. He further submits that after the conclusion of the plaintiff’s evidence, the application under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC was filed after a delay of one year and seven months. He, therefore, submits that the application has rightly been dismissed by the learned Trial Court. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. This Court finds that the FSL report was produced during the cross-examination of the plaintiff by the defendant, and prior thereto, there was no occasion for the plaintiff to rebut the same. It is further observed that allowing the document would not prejudice the rights of the defendant. Even if there is some delay, the same can be compensated by payment of costs to the defendant. 6. In view of the above, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the order dated 06.01.2026. The application of the plaintiff- petitioner under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC dated 28.11.2025 stands allowed. The document, in the form of an expert report, is taken on record subject to payment of costs of Rs. 20,000/- to the [2026:RJ-JP:16820] (3 of 3) [CW-1573/2026] defendant-respondent. After taking the document on record, the learned Trial Court shall proceed in accordance with law. 7. With the above observations, the present civil writ petition stands disposed of. 8. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (BIPIN GUPTA),J Sudha/29