( 1 ) CIVIL revision petition No. 3549/1992 is directed against the order of the learned Second Additional District Munsif, Vijayawada in I. A. No. 613 of 1992 in O. S. No. 1263 of 1987 allowing the application of the defendant for sending the suit promissory note to a private expert for determining the age of the ink used by the attestor and the scribe in the suit promissory note.

( 2 ) ALTHOUGH no reasons are given in the order impugned in this revision, evidently the same reasons given by the learned District Munsif on an identical application filed earlier LA. No. 1452 of 1991 which was allowed on 24-1-1992 weighed with him in allowing the present application. In the circumstances, it is necessary to refer to the earlier application for the purpose of ascertaining the reasons.

( 3 ) THE suit itself was filed by the petitioner-plaintiff on the strength of a promissory note, ex. A1 dated 11-6-1983 alleged to have been executed by the defendant for Rs. 16,300. 00. The defendant in his written statement admitted the execution, but plead- ed that the suit promissory note was not supported by consideration; because of the business transactions between the plaintiffs and