THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2545 OF 2010 DATED:30.06.2010 Between: Gotikala Mary Kamala and others .. Petitioners And Gaddem Raju .. Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2545 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners/plaintiffs are children of late Joseph Mariyani David Raju. They filed a suit for recovery of possession of suit schedule property being a house situated at Ward No.17/D, Danial Road, Eluru. Along with the plaint, the petitioners filed six documents which include the sale deed, dated 26.09.1974 under which the petitioners’ father purchased the suit schedule property, encumbrance certificate, valuation certificate and legal notices. The respondent/defendant entered appearance opposing the suit inter alia contending that during the lifetime of the petitioners’ father he purchased the property from late David Raju. Contending that the signature of David Raju is forged on the agreement of sale, the plaintiffs sought to file the service register as additional document under Order VII Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Observing that the same is not relevant to the fact in issue, the trial Court dismissed the I.A.No.182 of 2010 on 26.02.2010. This is challenged before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. A perusal of the plaint, which is placed before this Court, shows that the petitioners claim absolute title of the suit schedule property as successors of David Raju who purchased the land under a sale deed dated 26.09.1974. Therefore, as rightly observed by the trial Court, service register is not at all relevant to the issue. If the petitioners dispute the signature on the agreement of sale relied on by the respondent, they have other means of getting the said document sent to handwriting expert by producing contemporary signatures of their father. In that view of the matter, the error pointed out is not one, which is not capable of correction by the trial Court at subsequent stage. The Civil Revision Petition is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) 30.06.2010 KH