THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P.NO : 3774 of 2009 Between: A.Prabhavathi ..... PETITIONER AND P.Venkata Ramana. .....RESPONDENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P.No.3774 of 2009 ORDER: Petitioner is the defendant. The respondent-plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.83 of 2008, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi, for recovery of Rs.83,800/- based on the pronote said to have been executed by the petitioner on 15-08-2007. After closure of the evidence, adduced by both the plaintiff and the defendant, and when the suit came up for arguments, the petitioner-defendant filed I.A.No.993 of 1999 for sending the suit pronote to handwriting expert so as to compare the same with his signature in the joining report, dated 01-04-2006, of his service records maintained by the Tamil Department, Arts College Building, S.V. Engineering College, Tirupathi, where he is working as Junior Assistant. The trial Court dismissed the said application on the ground that the signature of the petitioner-defendant, on the joining report, is not admitted by the respondent-plaintiff and if really, his signature is genuine on the joining report, the petitioner-defendant could have summoned the document. But the petitioner-defendant, without taking any steps to summon the document, cannot seek the relief of sending his signature on the pronote to the additional expert opinion for comparison of the same with the signature on the joining report. Admittedly, the petitioner-defendant has not filed any documents containing the signatures as admitted by the respondent- plaintiff. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the trial Court did not commit any error, in dismissing the application. Hence, I do not see any legal infirmity in the impugned order. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. ________________ 13th August 2009 Kvr