HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5340 OF 2011 . DATED 9TH DECEMBER, 2011 BETWEEN Lingampalli Ravi Kumar …Petitioner And Morla Gopala Krishna ….Respondent. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5340 OF 2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No. 736 of 2009 assailing the order dated 28.09.2011 passed by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Jangareddygudem, West Godavari District, whereby the application in I.A.No. 785 of 2011 filed by the respondent/defendant seeking to send the suit pronote dated 20.6.2007 to a handwriting expert for comparison of disputed signatures on the suit pronote with that of the admitted signatures in the documents filed by him was allowed. The petitioner herein filed the suit in O.S.No. 736 of 2009 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Jangareddygudem, against the respondent for recovery of the suit amount on the strength of the promissory note dated 20.06.2007. The evidence from the side of the petitioner was closed long back and when the suit is coming up for the evidence of the respondent, he filed the impugned application seeking the relief as stated supra. The petitioner opposed the said application by filing counter. He stated in the counter affidavit that the respondent is in the habit of changing the signatures in different styles and as such, he prayed the Court below to send the postal acknowledgment, suit summons, vakalat, counter and written statement filed by him for comparison of the signatures with that of the disputed signature on the suit pronote, in the event of the application was allowed. The Court below allowed the application accordingly in terms of the petitioner through the order under revision and directed the respondent to appear and engross his signatures before the Court below. Heard. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent is in the habit of frequently changing his signatures in different styles; that the signatures of the respondent on the vakalat, postal acknowledgement and written statement were never admitted by the petitioner as true and genuine and that the respondent filed the impugned application only to protract the on going suit proceedings. Perused the case file. It is well settled principle of law that whenever a party disputes the signature appending on a particular document, two remedies are open to him, namely, either to request the court to compare the signatures or to file an application to send the document to an expert for comparison. When the respondent opted to file an application to send the document to a handwriting expert, no prejudice will normally be caused to either party. When the petitioner is asserting that the respondent is frequently changing the style of his signatures, science has now been developed to compare such signatures also by taking into consideration the direction of the strokes, the speed of writing, the pattern of writing etc.,. Therefore, it cannot be said that no useful purpose will be served by sending the documents to an expert. Pertinent to note, the opinion of an expert with regard to the signatures or handwriting in the disputed document is not conclusive, but is only a piece of evidence and it is ultimately for the Court to arrive at its own conclusion on appreciation of the entire evidence on record. Further it is to be seen that in the counter filed by the petitioner to the impugned application, he beseeched the Court below to send postal acknowledgment, suit summons, vakalat, counter and written statement filed by him for comparison of the signatures in the event the impugned application was allowed. In view of the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that it is in the interest of both the parties to send the suit documents to an expert for comparison, which would not cause any amount of prejudice to the petitioner/plaintiff Therefore, I do not see any illegality or infirmity in the order under revision passed by the Court below. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. -------------------------------------- JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 9TH December, 2011. Msnro