THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4892 of 2009 ORDER: The respondent filed O.S.No.361 of 2003 in the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Avanigadda for recovery of certain amount on the strength of a bill. The petitioner denied his liability to the respondent. To establish that the signature contained on the bill does not belong to him, the petitioner filed I.A.No.1007 of 2007 under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act (for short ‘the Act’) with a request to send the disputed document for opinion of an expert. An order was passed on 17.09.2007 and the disputed document, together with the specimen signatures of the petitioner herein was sent to the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory at Visakhapatnam. Thereafter, substantial correspondence ensued between the Court and the Forensic Science Laboratory. On finding that the expert named in the order is not cooperating and is delaying the matter beyond all reasonable limits, the trial Court passed an order, dated 16.09.2009, closing the I.A. Reference was made to a judgment of this Court in Pamu Padmavathi Vs. Perati Yakub Reddy[1], wherein it was held that the Court itself has the power under Section 73 of the Act to compare the signatures. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the said order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. The trial Court found some basis in the request made by the petitioner in sending the document to the expert for opinion. If the expert did not cooperate with the Court and did not discharge his functions to its satisfaction, the very remedy claimed by the petitioner cannot be denied. The document can be sent to another expert, duly informing him that the matter cannot wait for long. Hence, the civil revision petition is allowed and the order under revision is modified to the effect that the trial Court shall send the document, together with the specimen signatures for opinion of another expert, duly intimating him that the report shall be submitted not later than three months from the date of receiving the document. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:23.06.2010 kdl [1] 2008(3) ALD 669