THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4426 of 2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order dated 08.08.2011 passed by the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool in I.A.No.535 of 2011 in O.S.No.62 of 2009, whereunder and whereby the petition filed by the respondent/defendant under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to send Exs.A.2 to A.4 along with the admitted signatures of the defendant in the suit to handwriting expert for comparison and opinion, was allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the disputed documents i.e., Exs.A.2 to A.4 are said to have been executed by the respondent/defendant between 2002 and 2006, and therefore, it would be necessary for the defendant to produce contemporaneous documents for the purpose of comparison and opinion of the Expert. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent contended that the trial Court rightly ordered to send the disputed documents to the Expert along with the admitted signatures of the respondent for the purpose of compensation. The suit is filed for redemption of mortgage. It is not in dispute that the documents-Exs.A.2 to A.4 were alleged to have been executed by the defendant between 2002 and 2006. The vakalat and written statement were filed by the defendant in the year 2009. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the contemporaneous documents containing the signatures of the defendant, if any, available during the period of execution of Exs.A.2 to A.4 can also be sent along with the vakalat and the written statement so that the Expert could give opinion with regard to the comparison of the disputed documents with that of the admitted signatures. There is sufficient force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence, the impugned order is modified directing the trial Court to send the disputed documents Exs.A.2 to A.4 along with written statement and vakalat and also contemporaneous documents containing signatures of the defendant, if any, available during the period 2002 to 2006. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. K.C. BHANU, J Date: 02.12.2011 va