Suit itself barred by res judicata.

This Revision Petition is directed against the order of II Additional District Munsif, Coimbatore in I.A.No.98/2001 in O.S.No.2473/1996 (dated 16.03.2001) dismissing the Application to send the Promissory Note dated 24.11.1983 to Handwriting Expert for the purpose of comparison of the signature thereon with the admitted signatures in the presence of the Officer of the Court.

2. This Revision Petition arises out of the following common grounds:-

(i) O.S.No.352/1986 - II Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore:

The Respondent / Defendant filed this Suit for recovery of Rs.15,672/= on Promissory Note for Rs.12,000/= (dated 24.11.1983). Revision Petitioner contested the said suit. In the said suit, the main contention raised by the Revision Petitioner was denial of execution of the said Promissory Note. In the said suit, Revision Petitioner had filed Application in I.A.110/1987 for sending the Suit Promissory Note to obtain the opinion of the Handwriting Expert and the same was dismissed. After full trial, O.S.No.352/1986 was decreed.

(ii) A.S.No.38/1987:-

Aggrieved over the decreeing of the suit, the Revision Petitioner has filed this Appeal before District Judge, Coimbatore. The Appeal was heard on merits. Confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court in O.S.No.352/1986, A.S.No.38/1987 was dismissed on 24.12.1988. As against the concurrent findings of courts below, Revision Petitioner had also filed a Second Appeal. Finding that no substantial question of law is involved, the Second Appeal was dismissed even in the admission stage.

(iii) E.P.No.162 of 1988:

O.S.352/1986

Respondent has filed this Execution Petition to execute the decree passed in O.S.No.352/1986 and the Execution Petition was posted on 12.10.1988. While the Execution Petition was so pending, Revision Petitioner had filed the present suit O.S.No.656/1988 on the file of Sub Court, Coimbatore (re-numbered as O.S.No.2473/1996 - DMC, Coimbatore).

(iv) O.S.No.656/1988 - Sub Court, Coimbatore (re-numbered as O.S.No.2473/1996 - District Munsif Court, Coimbatore)

After being unsuccessful in all the Forums, Revision Petitioner had re-opened the entire issues re-agitating the matter, attacking the Suit Promissory Note and the decree passed on merits in O.S.No.352/1986. The present suit O.S.No.2473/1996 originally filed in the Sub Court, Coimbatore in O.S.No.656/1988 is for the cancellation of the decree obtained by the Respondent in O.S.No.352/1986 as having been obtained fraudulently by the use of a false document.

3. Case of Revision Petitioner / Plaintiff is that he had borrowed a sum of Rs.3,000/= from the Defendant on 16.06.1981, for which the Respondent had taken his signatures in four stamped blank papers from the Revision Petitioner and the Respondent paid only a cash of Rs.2,700/= deducting advance interest of Rs.300/=. Towards discharge the Promissory Note debt, Revision Petitioner had totally paid Rs.7,600/=. Respondent had not only refused to pass receipt, but also inspite of repeated demands failed to return the Promissory Note executed by the Revision Petitioner. The Promissory Note for Rs.12,000/= filed in O.S.No.352/1986 is a concocted false document. Further case of the Revision Petitioner is that the Respondent made use of the false document in O.S.No.352/1986 and fraudulently obtained the decree thereon and the Plaintiff is entitled to have the matter re-opened under section 44 of the Evidence Act and is entitled to get a declaration that the decree in O.S.No.352/1986 is null and void and not binding upon the Plaintiff.

4. Respondent is resisting the suit by filing the written statement contending that the Suit is barred by Res Judicata and that the decree in O.S.No.352/1986 operates as Res Judicata. When the contested decree in O.S.No.352/1986 was confirmed by the Appellate Court / District Judge, Coimbatore in A.S.No.38/1987, Revision Petitioner having exhausted his remedies has filed the present suit for the purpose of harassing the Respondent