IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No : 4003 of 2009 Between: Gudla Chinna Verra Reddy, Peddapappur Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND V.Narayana Reddy, Thutralapalli, Anantapur District. ...RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI C.R.P.No.4003 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner herein is the defendant in O.S No.114 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Gooty, filed by the respondent herein/plaintiff for recovery of money allegedly due from the petitioner under Ex.A1-promissory note. In the written statement, the defendant pleaded that he never signed on Ex.A-1-promissaoy note and his signatures were forged. After the closure of the plaintiff’s evidence, the defendant filed an application to send the signatures on the suit promissory note for comparison with the admitted signatures on the vakalat. The Court below dismissed the said application by order dated 6.4.2009 and aggrieved by the same, the present Revision Petition is filed. Admittedly, the signature on Ex.A1 is in Telugu whereas the signature of the defendant in his vakalat is in English. Moreover having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence already available on record, the Court below was of the opinion that there was no need to send the document in question for expert opinion. The said discretion exercised by the Court below cannot be said to be arbitrary or perverse. Hence, the interference by this Court is not warranted in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. _______________ Justice G.Rohini Date:08.09.2009 mrb