JUSTICE V.K. JAIN (ORAL) The main issues involved in this petition is as to whether four cheques honoured by the petitioner Bank were signed by the authorised signatory of the respondent, i.e., Principal of the school, namely, Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma and Director of the Society, namely, Mr. Abhay Mal Shah managing the said school or not. The case of the petitioner Bank is that the aforesaid cheques bear genuine signatures of the authorised signatories, whereas the case of the respondent is that the signatures on the cheques were forged. The petitioner Bank took the opinion of a handwriting expert Ms. Renu Kumari who opined that the signatures on the cheques were genuine signatures. The respondent took the opinion of another handwriting expert Mr. Krishna Charan who opined that the signatures on the cheques were forged signatures. An FIR was also registered by the concerned police station and the disputed signatures were sent to FSL for the opinion of the handwriting expert. The handwriting expert of FSL opined that the signatures on the cheques had been forged. However, the criminal trial instituted on the basis of the said report has not taken off, since one of the accused has died and the remaining two are absconding. 2. The petitioner Bank filed the affidavit of its handwriting expert before the District Forum, though the handwriting expert was not cross-examined. The respondent did not file the affidavit of the handwriting expert engaged by it nor was he produced as a witness. The District Forum did not examine the handwriting expert of FSL. In my view the appropriate course of action would have been to examine all the handwriting experts with opportunity to the parties to cross-examine them before the District Forum. The complainant/respondent should have been given an opportunity to cross-examine the handwriting expert of the petitioner Bank. The respondent should also be given an opportunity to file the affidavit of the handwriting expert engaged by it and produce that expert for the purpose of cross-examination by the petitioner Bank. The District Forum should also examine the handwriting expert of FSL and give opportunity to both the parties to cross-examine him. 3. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the District Forum for deciding the complaint afresh in the light of this order after considering the expert opinion produced by the parties as well as the expert opinion from the FSL. The respondent is permitted to file the affidavit of its expert before the concerned District Forum on the next date of hearing. The District Forum shall also summon the handwriting expert of FSL, examine him and give liberty to the parties to cross-examine him. The petitioner will produce its handwriting expert before the District forum for cross-examination by the respondent. 4. The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on 8.12.2016. 5. The amount which the petitioner Bank had deposited with the concerned District Forum shall remain deposited till the complaint is decided afresh and an appropriate order with respect to disbursal of the said amount shall be passed by the District Forum while deciding the complaint afresh in terms of this order. 6. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. | 
