SH. RADHEY SHYAM AND ANR vs SURESH SHARMA

Judgment text excerpt

$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 19th February, 2026 + CM(M) 110/2023 & CM APPL. 3591/2023 SH. RADHEY SHYAM AND ANR .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Harshil Gupta and Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocates (through VC). versus SURESH SHARMA .....Respondent Through Mr. Ishu Arora, Ms. Parul and Ms. Manisha, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA ORDER (Oral) Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J. 1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (‘COI’) assailing the order dated 26th November, 2022, passed by the learned Trial Court in Ex. 260/2018, whereby the application preferred by the petitioner/judgment debtor under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for sending the original receipts of payment for opinion of a handwriting expert has been dismissed. 3. Heard. Record perused. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court has passed the impugned order on the basis of surmises and conjectures, which is contrary to the material on record. It is contended that the judgment-debtor had made several payments to the respondent/decree-holder however, the issued receipts are now being denied by the respondent. It is, therefore, Signature Not Verified Signed By:MANISHA CM(M) 110/2023 Page 1 of 3 RAJPUT Signing Date:20.02.2026 11:35:57 submitted that in order to determine the exact amount paid by the judgment-debtor, examination of the said receipts by a handwriting expert is required. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that this application has been moved only to delay the execution proceedings and to delay the payment. It is further submitted that the learned Trial Court has passed th