Handwriting
Handwriting legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Differences between disputed and admitted writings-Described by experts as "natural variations"-Cursory examination by Court revealing "obvious disparities"-"Risky" to base a finding of genuineness of writing on expert's opinion
[Alleged divorce deed, without witnesses]-Evidence Act (1 of 1872), Ss. 45, 73.
Handwriting Handwriting-Court may form own opinion by comparing disputed signature with admitted signature on affidavit.
Handwriting Handwriting-Presence of all peculiarities of a handwriting in the disputed handwriting does not by itself exclude possibility of disputed handwriting being a forgery-Evidence Act (I of 1872), S.45.
Handwriting -Newspaper prints of-Unsatisfactory basis fat" conclusion as to authorship of handwriting-Evidence Act (I of 1872), S.45.
"Handwriting", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/2178
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Handwriting"
1993 C L C 1779
ABDUL GHAFFAR‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Karachi1985 C L C 2398
FAZALE HAQUE — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SAEED — Respondent
Court: Lahore2009 M L D 387
MUHAMMAD FAYYAZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents
Court: Lahore2014 C L C 222
ZULFIKAR ALI — Applicant Versus MUHAMMAD HANEEF — Respondent
Court: SindhP L D 1982 Peshawar 130
Mian MUHAMMAD AYUB‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: ---S. 13(v) & 14 read with Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 45‑Expert evidence ‑‑ Handwriting, proof of ‑ Prosecution alleging petitioner having kept diaries wherein he noted cases of sodomy committed by him against students‑None of such diaries produced and exhibited at trail before Tribunal‑Handwriting expert referring to three diaries but such diaries not produced by prosecution at all‑Specimen hand writings of petitioner not placed on record and not known as to when, where, and in whose presence specimens of petitioner's hand writing obtained by expert‑Nothing on record showing Handwriting Expert, examined at trial, having been an "expert" as contemplated by S. 45 of Evidence Act, 1872 ‑Expert also giving no reasons whatsoever for his opinion regarding handwritings in diaries being those of petitioner and resembled with specimen handwriting obtained from him‑Petitioner denying writings in dlaries and star witness not claiming to have seen petitioner writing in diaries‑A teacher appearing in defence positively denying disputed writings to be those of petitioner there being a word of star prosecution witness against word of another teacher, no reason to give preference to former over latter particularly when prosecution witness an interested witness belonging to a rival group of teachers‑None of modes required to prove handwriting followed by prosecution‑Prosecution, held, failed to . prove its case.‑Evidence.1987 S C M R 1604
KHAN MUHAMMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Court: High Court2005 M L D 1761
SHAUKAT ALI — Appellant Versus PARVEZ AKHTAR — Respondent
Court: Lahore2015 M L D 54
MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
Court: Lahore1991 P L C 447
Present: Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal MUHAMMAD ASHFAOUDDIN SIDDIOUI Versus Messrs SIEMEN PAKISTAN ENGINEERING CO. LTD. and another
Court: Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh1987 P Cr
Malik MUHAMMAD IQBAL‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Court: Karachi