##PAGE1##

1

2026:APHC:41238 APHC010100452026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3299]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 799/2026 Between:

1. C HEPALA BANGARAYYA,, S/O KASULU, AGED 48 YEARS, OCC.

CULTIVATION, RESIDING AT GAJREDDIPALEM VILLAGE, RAMBILLI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT.

2. C HEPALA KANAKAYYA,, S/O KASULU, AGED 46 YEARS, OCC.

CULTIVATION, RESIDING AT GAJREDDIPALEM VILLAGE, RAMBILLI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. K ARANAM NARASIMHA MURTHY, S/o Ramaswamy, Aged 59 years, R/o D.No.7-143/1, Lakshmidevipeta, Chodavaram Village, Anakapalli

District.

...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. P VIJAYA KUMARI Counsel for the Respondent:

1.

The Court made the following:

##PAGE2##

2

2026:APHC:41238

##PAGE3##

3

2026:APHC:41238 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

C.R.P.No.799 of 2026

ORDER:

The defendants are the petitioners. The plaintiff/respondent filed

O.S.No.15 of 2022 for recovery of the amount based on the promissory

note/Ex.A1.

2. The petitioners/defendants inter alia denied their signatures and the execution of promissory note/Ex.A1. They filed I.A.No.236 of 2025 under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to send the disputed promissory

note for expert opinion with respect to the signatures. 3. The plaintiff/respondent filed objection/counter.

4. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chodavaram, has dismissed I.A.No.236 of 2025 on 10.12.2025 and challenging the same, the present

C.R.P has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

5. The rejection is on the ground that the defendants/petitioners, did not submit nor mentioned about any contemporaneous document containing the

admitted signatures of the defendants.

6. As per the impugned order, the learned counsel for the defendants before the learned Trial Court also, submitted that no contemporaneous

##PAGE4##

4

document containing the admitted signatures of the defendants were

available.

7. Considering the same as also the judgments as mentioned therein viz. Dundi Mohan Rao v. Ponnada Gangadhar (2022 (6) ALT 81(AP), Rellu Rambabu v. Adapa Srinivasa Rao (2024(3) ALT 215 (AP), Zahed Shareef v. Abdul Hasan (Civil Revision Petition No.2272/2024 dated 27.09.2024), Yenni Venkata Ramana v. Boyana Ramesh Kumar (2024(6) ALT 736(AP), Krishna Susheela v. Khadeerunnisa (Civil Revision Petition No.393/2025 dated 24.03.2025) and Bande Siva Shankara Srinivasa Prasad v. Ravi Surya Prakash Babu (2016(2) ALD 1 FB, the learned Trial Court rejected the petition observing that in the absence of the contemporaneous documents containing the admitted signatures of the defendants, which were not available to the

Court, the promissory note could not be send for comparision of signatures.

8. Ms.P.Vijaya Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioners does not dispute about the non-availability of the contemporaneous documents containing any admitted signatures of the defendants. She, however, placing reliance in the case of Kapula Sebastian v. Bhukya Bicha, 2026:APHC:41238 of the Telangana High Court, submits that in the absence of contemporaneous documents, the learned Trial Court ought to have taken the signatures in the open Court and

from those signatures the disputed signatures could have been tallied.

1 2025(3) Law Summary 169

##PAGE5##

5

2026:APHC:41238

9. Para No.7 of Kapula Sebastian (supra), reads as under:

“No doubt, Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act empowers a judge to take up the task of comparison comparison of deputed signature with admitted signatures. However, the Indian Evidence Act also makes a provision for seeking expert opinion whenever there is dispute about the genuineness of the signatures or the hand writing in a given document. In the instant case, there is disputed signature on the revenue stamp of the year 2016 and there are admitted signatures of the year 2019. The Trial Court could have summo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document