1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 212 OF 2007 (Omprakash Shivdayal Varma .v. Vijay Shivdayal Varma and others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri R.S. Charpe, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.P. Panpaliya, Advocate for the respondent No.2. Shri D.B. Ynegal, AGP for the respondent Nos.5 and 6. CORAM : R.V. MORE, J. 29TH APRIL, 2008. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties. By filing this petition under Article 227, the petitioner challenges the order of trial Court where under his application at Exh.87 taken out for examination of signature of late Sharda Varma and the signature of the petitioner himself on the document in question from handwriting expert came to be rejected. The petitioner has examined himself in the month of August, 2005 and thereafter examined three more witnesses in the month of February, 2006 and closed his side. The respondent No.2 also examined himself and thereafter in the month of July, 2006, the petitioner completed cross-examination of this respondent. The respondent No.2 also examined his 2 witness Shri Nemade. He was cross-examined by the petitioner. The respondent No.1 also given closure pursis so the suit is closed for argument and thereafter the petitioner filed the present application. The trial Court rejected the same on the ground that the same is filed at belated stage and secondly the petitioner himself is given admission in cross-examination that the will deed is signed by his mother late Sharda Varma. In my view, the trial Court rejected the petitioner's application correctly by giving cogent reason. I do not find any error which enables me to interfere in the impugned order while exercising my jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Needless to mention that the observations made by the learned trial Judge while rejecting petitioner's application by the impugned order are made for the purposes of disposal of petitioner's application at Exh.87 and the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same at the time of disposal of the suit. JUDGE *rrg.