IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.28 of 2011 & 282 of 2011 Date: 29.07.2011 CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.28 of 2011 Between: A.Venkata Subbamma (died) A. Subba Rangaiah and 4 others. .....Petitioners AND S. Nazeer Ahmed ....Respondent CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.282 of 2011 Between: A.Venkata Subbamma (died) A. Subba Rangaiah and 4 others. .....Petitioners AND S. Nazeer Ahmed ....Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.28 of 2011 & 282 of 2011 COMMON ORDER: 1. Since, both the C.R.Ps arose out of two different orders in the same suit, both of them are clubbed together and disposed of by way of this common order. 2. Civil Revision Petition No.28 of 2011 is filed challenging the order dated 07.12.2010 passed in I.A.No.974 of 2010 in O.S.No.313 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool whereunder and whereby the petition filed by the petitioner to condone the delay to receive the documents in the main suit was allowed. 3. Civil Revision Petition No.282 of 2011 is filed challenging the order dated 07.12.2010 passed in I.A.No.975 of 2010 in O.S.No.313 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool whereunder and whereby the petition filed by the petitioner to send the slip containing writings and signatures of A.S.R. Gupta dated 1.7.2003 along with the admitted signatures and pronote to the Hand Writing Expert in Truth Laboratories, Hyderabad for comparision and opinion was allowed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the sole respondent. 5. Ordinarily, this Court would not interfere with the order exercising the powers under Section 227 of the Constitution of India unless the order under challenge is illegal or contrary to the law. The affidavit filed in support of the petition would go to show that P.W.1 admitted his hand writings in Exs.B.2 and B.3 and also admitted his business dealings with them as per Ex.B.1. But, he did not admit his signature and hand writing on the document dated 1.7.2003 and therefore those documents are necessary to prove the case. That petition was ordered by the trial court as proper explanation was given for not filing the documents at the time of filing of the suit and by sending the documents to Hand Writing Expert, no prejudice would be caused. More over the suit is coming up for arguments and the suit is of the year 2007. At the fag end of the case, the present applications are filed. There is no averment in the written statement about the paper slip dated 1.7.2003 containing the hand writing and the signature of P.W.1 along with other writings and the Xerox copy of the statement dated 29.5.2004 was written by the father of P.W.1. Therefore, in the absence of pleadings, any amount of evidence is value less. Therefore, in the absence of specific plea, trial court ought not to have allowed the petitions because the defendant/respondent herein has come forward with a new version of his case without there being any pleadings. Further more, the present applications are filed at a belated stage. Filing of petitions at the stage of arguments is unwarranted without good and sufficient reasons. No such reasons are assigned in the impugned order. Therefore, the impugned orders in both the IAs are set aside. 6. Accordingly, both the C.R.Ps are allowed. No order as to costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU,J Date: 29th July, 2011. Gk THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.28 of 2011 & 282 of 2011 Date: 29.07.2011 Gk.