Supreme Court: Courts must compare signatures themselves, not rely on experts

The case concerns a dispute over the genuineness of a 'Will' in an eviction matter, specifically whether a court is legally required to send the document to a handwriting expert or if it can compare signatures itself under Section 72 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.

Who it concerns: Appellant: Gopal Pathak; Respondents: Nitin Alias Pappu and Omprakash; Bench: Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Manmohan.

What the court decided

• Allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court order dated 27.10.2025.
• Restored the Trial Court order dated 06.10.2025 (RCSA No. 577A/2020) which had rejected the request for expert examination.
• Held that it is the duty of the Court to compare signatures and form its own opinion, and that expert opinion is not 'essential' in all cases.
• Directed that the eviction matter be expedited and taken to its logical conclusion.
• Disposed of any pending applications.

Also in the document

• The Court clarified that the previous precedent in Thiruvengada Pillai v. Navaneethammal & Anr. involved a finger impression, not handwriting, and cannot be read to mandate expert witnesses for all signature disputes.
• The Court noted that the application for expert opinion was filed four years after trial proceedings commenced and after evidence was recorded.
• The Court stated that expert evidence is merely an opinion and is not binding on the Court.