IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4754 of 2010 Between: Reddy Govinda Rao ..... PETITIONER AND Putta Venkata Rama Apparao .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4754 of 2010 O R D E R: Petitioner is the defendant in the suit O.S.34/2009 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Chodavaram filed by the respondent herein for recovery of amount based on the promissory note dated 05.03.2007 executed by the petitioner herein. It is stated that the petitioner filed an application in I.A.198/2010 under Sec.45 of the Indian Evidence Act for sending the promissory note along with his signatures to handwriting expert and fingerprint expert for comparison and opinion. The said application was dismissed by the Court below. The petitioner conveniently has not filed the copy of the application filed by him for sending the promissory note to the expert opinion. In the said application, the respondent/plaintiff filed counter stating that the defendant has not pleaded in his written statement specifically that the signature of the defendant in Ex.A1 is forged. Since there is no denial in the pleadings of the defendant, the defendant cannot be permitted to send Ex.A1 promissory note for expert opinion. I do not see any tenable grounds in the application filed by the petitioner for sending the promissory note for expert opinion by comparing the signature on the promissory note with that of any admitted signature of the defendant as admitted by the plaintiff. The Court below rightly dismissed the application filed by the petitioner. I do not see any infirmity legal or otherwise to interfere with the said order. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 11.03.2011 Dsr