THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.99 OF 2007 ORDER: Heard the counsel. The Learned counsel representing the petitioner states that the rejection of application at the threshold cannot be sustained. The learned counsel representing the respondent would however state that while reserving the main suit for judgment, this application had been rejected. In the light of the reasons recorded by the learned Judge, it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. This revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is preferred by the petitioner-defendant against the order dated 12.07.2006 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, in C.F.R.No.23107 of 2006 in O.S.No.205 of 1995, rejecting the application filed under Order 26 Rule 10(A) C.P.C., to send certain documents to Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderrabad for examination by the hand writing expert. The order under challenge reads as hereunder. “Petitioner reported not ready in spite of several adjournments and main suit is reserved for judgment. Hence there is no necessity to call this petition along with main suit. Hence this petition is rejected.” It is no doubt true that normally making an order of rejection at the threshold may not just and proper, but however, in the light of the reasons recorded, this Court is not inclined to exercise the discretion under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ (P.S. NARAYANA, J.) 23rd June, 2010 Js.