THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3238 of 2011 ORDER: Respondent No.1 filed O.S.No.15 of 2005 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Addanki against the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 to 6 for the relief of declaration to the effect that the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioners herein on 29.01.2005 is null and void and that it is not binding upon it. The petitioners filed a written statement to the effect that the sale deed was preceded by an agreement of sale executed on 08.11.2004 by the then President, late Annem Ayyapu Reddy, and Secretary, late Dharmavarapu Radha Krishna, defendant No.1 in the suit, who is since dead and represented by his legal representatives, respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein. Respondent No.1 filed I.A.No.705 of 2010 under Section 45 of the Evidence Act (for short ‘the Act’) with a prayer to send the agreement of sale together with undisputed document said to have been executed by late Annem Ayyapu Reddy. The petitioners did not file any counter opposing the I.A. The trial Court allowed the I.A. through order, dated 20.10.2010. Hence, this revision. Sri C.Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the occasion for a trial Court to send a disputed document for opinion of an expert would arise only when an undisputed document is placed before it and that in the instant case, no such document was placed at all. He has raised some other grounds also. Though respondent No.1 is served with notice, it has not entered appearance. There is no second opinion about the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners. However, the question as to whether the document which is filed by a petitioner in an application filed under Section 45 of the Act is admitted or not, can be considered, if only an objection is raised in this regard by the contesting parties. The petitioners did not choose to contest the I.A. as is evident from the fact that no counter as such, was filed. Naturally, the trial Court took the document relied upon by respondent No.1 as undisputed one. The function of the expert is only to compare the signatures on the disputed document on the one hand and the undisputed document on the other and submit a report. In case the finding is in favour of the petitioners, no further steps need to be taken. On the other hand, if the opinion runs contrary to the plea of the petitioners, they can certainly make an effort to allege and prove that the document, which is sent to the expert as an undisputed one, has not been executed by the individual concerned. At any rate, the opinion of an expert is not absolute and it is subject to several objections that may be submitted by the parties concerned. Hence, the civil revision petition is dismissed. It is, however, left open to the petitioners to raise all objections that are open to them in law in case the opinion of expert goes against them. The petitioners shall be entitled to seek the copies of the documents, which are sent for opinion of the expert. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:11.10.2011. kdl