THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2426 of 2022

ORDER:

Heard Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the Order dated 30.08.2022 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.81 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Judge, Khammam.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the said suit filed by the respondent No.1 for recovery of money against the petitioner No.1 institute and others. After completion of evidence, the respondent No.1 herein filed I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.81 of 2018 for sending signatures of the petitioners to a hand writing expert to form an opinion. The petitioners herein filed his counter by opposing the aforesaid petition and categorically mentioned that it is necessary that signatures contemporaneous to the disputed signatures are to be sent for comparison and the petition is vague and superfluous and the whole exercise is of no avail in view of the inconclusiveness of such evidence and the wastage of the precious time of the Hon’ble Court. But the Court below without taking into account of the contentions raised by the petitioners herein going beyond the prayer and allowed the petition.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that during the cross examination of DW1 and DW2, they have denied the signatures on Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 respectively, though in the written statement dated 05.10.2018 filed by the DW1 and DW2 categorically stated that the Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 are fabricated and forged. The Court below after allowing the Interlocutory Application, further erred in insisting the petitioners to appear before the Court for taking their signatures in open court. The disputed documents are of the year 2013 and seeking signatures of petitioners, i.e., DW1 and DW2 for the purpose of comparison is unwarranted and illogical and against the established procedure and requested to allow the Civil Revision Petition.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners relied upon the order passed by the Madras High Court in S.Chinnathai Vs. K.C.Chinnadurai, [2009 SCC Online Mad 1166]

6. Learned Counsel for the respondents basing on the counter submits that the evidence of the plaintiff is completed and the petitioners herein denied their own signatures in Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 during their respective cross examination. The respondents herein field I.A.No.1 of 2021 for sending the signatures of the defendant Nos.2 and 3 to the handwriting expert to form an opinion for better adjudication of the case. The court below allowed the petition and rightly held that no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners herein and when they contested the suit with an allegation that their signatures are forged and they denied their signatures.

7. Learned Counsel for the respondents further submits that the Court below rightly called the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 to appear before the court for taking the signatures on 07.09.2022 and on 22.09.2022. But they failed to appear before the Court below and the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 having left with no other opinion for defending their case to avoid huge liability, denying their own signatures and on the other hand alleging that their signatures are forged and the Court below rightly allowed I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.81 of 2018 filed by the plaintiff and there is no valid ground to allow the petition and requested to dismiss the Civil Revision Petition.

8. After hearing both sides and on perusing the records the respondent No.1/plaintiff filed suit in O.S.No.81 of 2018 for recovery of money against the petitioners and the respondents filed petition without mentioning about the documents sending to a hand writing expert. The respondent herein filed I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.81 of 2018 and the petitioners herein filed their counter denying the said petition. But the Court below without taking into account of the same and without mentioning about any document,