C.R.P.(PD)(MD) No.1460 of 2008 is filed challenging the order dated 25.2.2008 made in I.A.Ho.303 of 2007 in I.A.No.341 of 2006 in O.S.”No.394 of 2005 on the file of the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, wherein the prayer of the third defendant under Order 26 Rule 9 and Section 151 of CPC, for comparing the signatures in the admitted documents to decide the issues involved in the suit regarding the disputed signatures, was rejected.

2. C.R.P.(PD)(MD) No.2293 of 2008 is filed challenging the order made in I.A.No.962 of 2007 in I.A.No.491 of 2007 in O.S.No. 394 of 2005, wherein the prayer of the first defendant under Section 151 CPC, for appointing an Advocate Commissioner, in whose presence the examination of the disputed documents were sought to be made by the expert, was rejected.

3. The brief facts necessary for disposal of these revision petitions are that the first respondent in both the revision petitions filed the suit O.S.No.394 of 2035 praying for a decree declaring that the first respondent/plaintiff and the defendants are jointly entitled to the suit ‘A’ schedule well as co-owners and the third defendant is not having any independent right over the same a