Kamidi Rani And Another v. Undapalli Veera Venkata Subrahmanyam

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.6319 OF 2017 O R D E R :

This revision is filed against the order dated 13.09.2017, passed in IA.No.552/2016 in OS.No.274/2012 by the Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, wherein and whereby the application filed by the petitioners under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, seeking to send the original promissory note with relevant documents and admitted signatures to the handwriting expert for comparison and opinion, was dismissed.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

It is to be seen that the Court below dismissed the application of the petitioner on the ground that petitioners have not filed any contemporaneous document for comparing the disputed signatures with the admitted signatures. Now learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 'vakalat', written statement and acknowledgment of the legal notice issued on behalf of the plaintiff are all on record and petitioner is also willing to give signatures before this Court. Even in the affidavit in support of this application no such things are mentioned. In view of the same I do not see any error in the order passed by the Court below.

Accordingly, the CRP is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the contempt case, shall stand closed.

_____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 24.01.2018 t k