The High Court's revisional jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited to ensuring subordinate courts act within their jurisdiction, and requests for expert opinion on signatures executed 19 years apart are not permissible.

ORDER :

1. This civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , challenging the order in I.A.No.598 of 2024 in O.S.No.02 of 2019 dated 24.01.2025 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rajampet, dismissing the petition filed under Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act and Section 151 of C.P.C, 1908.

2. I.A.No.598 of 2024 is filed under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 whereunder the petitioners raised a plea of sending Ex.B-1 Registered Sale Deed dated 07.11.1984 along with thumb impression obtained from Sub- Registrar Office, Kadapa for opinion of handwriting expert for comparison of the same with the signatures of the deceased plaintiff No.1 with her signature available on vakalat and original plaint. The respondent opposed the petition on various grounds. The Court below upon hearing arguments of both sides, observed that, though thumb impression register is available during life time of deceased Plaintiff No.1, she has not evinced any interest to send thumb impression register to technical expert nor she sought for her thumb impressions before the Court to enable the Court to send thumb impression register to technical expert. Moreover, the petitioners have not filed any admitted thumb impressions of the petitioner No.1 to dispute thumb impression register to any finger print expert/ technical expert and at this belated stage, disputing the signatures along with signatures obtained in the open court cannot be referred to handwriting expert for comparison and dismissed I.A.No.598 of 2024.

3. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rajampeta, the present civil revision petition is filed, mainly on the ground that, such relief can be claimed at any stage of the suit and requested this Court to set-aside the order in I.A.No.598 of 2024 in O.S.No.02 of 2019 dated 24.01.2025 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rajampet.

4. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the contentions urged in the grounds of revision and would contend that, since there are no contemporaneous signatures of the deceased which are available, the signatures in register should be compared with the Vakalat. He further submits that, even though the recent signatures would be desirable for comparison, however it is not a bar to send the same for expert opinion whether the said signature is fit for comparison or not. Since the plaintiff and also the counsel passed away, proper steps could not be taken during the lifetime of deceased Plaintiff No.1. Finally, it is contended that, when there is specific pleading denying the execution of Sale Deed, sending the signature to the expert for comparison is a crucial evidence for effective adjudication of the matter.

5. However, learned counsel for the respondents contended that the Court cannot refer the disputed signatures and thumb impression for comparison with the signatures and thumb impression register obtained from Sub- Registrar Office, Kadapa, as there is a gap of more than nineteen years from the date of suit, till the date of filing petition, since there is a possibility of change in style of signatures, including change of writing for different reasons and requested this Court to dismiss the petition by confirming the order in I.A.No.598 of 2024 in O.S.No.02 of 2019 dated 24.01.2025 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rajampet.

6. The petitioners maintained silence for all these 20 years and suddenly filed I.A.No.598 of 2024 in the year 2024 i.e after lapse of time from the date of filing written statement.

7. Undoubtedly, as per the law declared in the judgments referred supra, the petitioner can seek such relief at any stage, including at the stage of arguments or first appeal or second appeal. But, the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners is otherwise. The specific request made in the petition is to send Ex.B-1 Registered Sale Deed dated 0