1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7192 OF 2009 _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office } Memoranda of Coram, } Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's } orders or directions } and Registrar's orders } ___________________________}___________________________________ Mr. S.V.Gangapurwala, Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. N.V.Gaware, Advocate for Respondent. ........................... [ CORAM : B.R.GAVAI, J. ] DATE : 12/11/2009. PER COURT : 1. By way of present petition, the petitioners challenge the Order dated 1/10/2009 passed by the learned 2nd Jt. Civil Judge (S.D.), Ahmednagar, thereby allowing an application filed by the respondent – defendant for referring certain documents for the opinion of Handwriting Expert and calling his report. 2 2. Mr. Gangapurwala, the learned counsel for petitioners submits that in the Suit, the plaintiff is yet to step into witness box. He submits that unless a party steps into witness box, a stage of referring the documents to Handwriting Expert would not arise. He, therefore, submits that the application has been allowed at premature stage. 3. Mr. Gaware, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent supports the impugned order. 4. The order impugned in the present Writ Petition is a discretionary order. Unless the discretion is sought to be exercised in perversity, interference would not warrant under extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. The learned trial court has found that the report of Handwriting Expert is useful to the court while deciding the matter and the parties would also get knowledge in which manner to adduce further evidence. 3 6. It can not thus be said that the discretion is exercised in perversity to warrant interference. Hence, rejected. 7. Needless to state that in any case the report of the Handwriting Expert would not be conclusive and what weightage has to be given to it, would always depend upon evidence that would be adduced by the parties. [ B.R.GAVAI ] JUDGE knp/WP7192.09