IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO : 3770 of 2009 Petition under Section ____ of CPC., to revise/against the order dated ______ in NO : of 0 on the file of the court of the Between: V.Reddenna Chetty, S/o. V.Venaktarathnam Chetty, Marripadu Village and Post, Gurramkonda Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND Mooramreddigari Ramachandra Reddy, S/o. M. Narayana Reddy, R/o. T.Rachapalli Village & Post, Gurramkonda Mandal, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent No: The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/CRP{GMS} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3770 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner is the defendant in the suit O.S.144/2008 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Vayalpad which was filed by the respondent/plaintiff for recovery of money based on the promissory note dated 14.04.2005. In the said suit the petitioner/defendant filed I.A.67/2009 under Sec.45 of the Indian Evidence Act for sending the suit promissory note along with his admitted signatures to the Government Handwriting Expert for scientific investigation. The said application has been dismissed by the Court below by order dated 20.07.2009, against which this civil revision petition is filed. A perusal of the affidavit filed by the petitioner/defendant before the Court below do not indicate the filing of any documents containing his signatures at the relevant point of time which are admitted by the plaintiff. It appears that during course of arguments, the petitioner/defendant wanted to send the suit promissory note along with his signatures on the vakalat and written statement, which are obviously after four years of the promissory note to the handwriting expert for comparison. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the Court below rightly dismissed the said application on the ground that no signatures of the defendant at the relevant point of time were filed. I do not see any infirmity legal or otherwise to interfere with the impugned order. This Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 13.08.2009 Dsr