( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3463 OF 2010 Shrimant s/o Appasaheb Deshmukh Since deceased, by his L.Rs. & another PETITIONERS VERSUS Arun s/o Mohanrao Gaikwad & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.R. Bharud, advocate holding for Mr. V.D. Salunke, advocate for the petitioners. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 15th June, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel. 2. The petitioners filed suit wherein they relied upon a will-deed allegedly executed by deceased Subhadrabai Deshmukh. The contesting respondents/defendants alleged that the will-deed was fabricated and forged. The deceased – Subhadrabai Deshmukh was illiterate and allegedly gave her thumb impression on the private document i.e. will-deed. The defendants lateron applied for sending of the will-deed to the handwriting expert alongwith a copy of application/letter presented by deceased Subhadrabai Deshmukh to the District Central Cooperative Bank for opening of her saving account. The petitioners objected grant of such application on the ( 2 ) ground that the application presented to the D.C.C. Bank could have been forged and there was no admitted thumb impression of deceased Subhadrabai Deshmukh. The learned Judge of the trial Court repelled the objection and allowed the application for sending of the document to the handwriting expert. That order is subject matter of challenge of this petition. 3. There appears no perversity committed by the trial Court. The petitioners may adduce evidence, after the handwriting expert’s opinion is received, in order to demonstrate their contention that the application submitted to the D.C.C. Bank was outcome of any forgery. However, when the application was sought to be called and sent to the handwriting expert, it will have to be said that prima facie, such application was obtained in the course of regular business of the Bank and as such, could be treated as a document comparable for the purpose of opinion of the handwriting expert. I do not find merit in the petition. The petition is dismissed. No costs. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/wp3463-10