IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO : 3558 of 2009 Petition under Section ____ of CPC., to revise/against the order dated ______ in NO : of 0 on the file of the court of the Between: E.Ramamurthy Naidu, S/o. Krishnama Naidu, R/o. Muthinenivaripalle Village, Peddagorpadu Post, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND Smt.K.Kasthuri, W/o. Raja Naidu, R/o. Chinnagorpadu, Peddagorpadu Village & Mandal, Pakala Mandal, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SRINIVAS POLAVARAPU Counsel for the Respondent: The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/CRP{GMS} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3558 of 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Parakala dated 29.06.2009 in I.A.250/2009 in O.S.63/2005 in dismissing the I.A. filed under Or.18 Rule-17 CPC for recalling PW 2 for further examination and take his handwritings to compare the suit promissory note. The petitioner is the defendant in the suit. PW 2 was the scribe of the suit promissory note. The said suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff against him for recovery of money based on promissory note. The petitioner/defendant wants to recall PW 2 on the ground that before the figure of Rs.9,000/- ‘1’ figure is affixed making it as Rs.19,000/- with different ink and therefore, PW 2 is liable to be recalled for further cross examination and to take his handwritings to compare the suit promissory note by the Court. The said application has been dismissed, against which this civil revision petition is filed. The Court below dismissed the said application on the ground that the petitioner/defendant never disputed his signature on the promissory note, but his defence was that he has signed the promissory note without filling the blanks. If that be so, the plea of the defendant that the figure of Rs.9,000/-was made as Rs.19,000/- is quite contrary to his defence taken in the written statement. I am of the opinion that the Court below rightly rejected the said application. I do not see any infirmity legal or otherwise to interfere with the said order. This Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 13.08.2009 Dsr