HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.No. 4259 OF 2010 Date: 29-01-2011 Between Swarna Ramchandra Reddy ……….. Petitioner and Vemulapalli Pandu Ranga Rao and another …….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.No. 4259 OF 2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order, dated 28-08-2010 passed in I.A.No.968 of 2010 in O.S.No.327 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet. The respondent-plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale, and when the matter has come up for arguments, the petitioner-defendant No.1 filed I.A.No.968 of 2010 to send Ex.A-2, endorsement, to the handwriting expert for comparison of the admitted signatures with the disputed signatures. The Court below, after considering the material on record, dismissed the Application with the following observations: “Perused the record. When the suit has been coming up for arguments, this application was filed by 1st respondent to send Ex.A2 endorsement to the handwriting expert for comparison of his admitted signature or specimen signatures with the disputed signature found beneath Ex.A2 endorsement on the back of Ex.A1. He took such plea with the written statement. He cross-examined the plaintiff and his witnesses with such contention but he never made iota of attempt to file this application in order to seek the opinion of handwriting expert. Even though the 1st defendant was coming regularly on the every date of adjournment of the suit, he did not choose to cross-examine the plaintiff and his witnesses at the first instance. 2. While suit was coming up for his evidence and evidence of D2, he filed application to permit him to cross-examine them. Even at such stage, he did not choose to file this application u/s 45 of Indian Evidence Act. When the suit was coming up for ripe to its logical end, this application was filed to hamper the disposal of the suit on merits. In other words, this application was filed at a belated stage though he had every opportunity to seek such relief at the earliest point of time or within reasonable time during conclusion of receipt of evidence by this Court.” Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as follows: “45. Opinions of experts.—When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts. Such persons are called experts.” A reading of the above provision, it is clear that the Court is empowered to form an opinion upon a point or issue in question on its own. Normally the question of sending a document or signature or impression for expert opinion arises only if the Court is not in a position to assess/compare on its own or where the issue involves examination by an expert. In this case the Court found that there is no necessity for opinion of the expert which, being a discretionary order passed by the Court below, does not warrant any interference by this Court. De horse this the Court also found that the application was filed at a belated stage though the petitioner had ample opportunity to seek such relief at the earliest point of time. The Civil Revision Petition fails and it is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 29-01-2011 YCR