IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3298 and 3305 of 2006 CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3298 of 2006 Between: P. Usha Rao ..... PETITIONER(S) AND M/s.Avinash Constructions and another .....RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3305 of 2006 Between: P. Gopal Rao ..... PETITIONER(S) AND M/s.Avinash Constructions and another .....RESPONDENT(S) HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3298 and 3305 of 2006 COMMON ORDER: Since these two revisions virtually involve common question, they are being taken up together for disposal. Petitioners, who are the plaintiffs in the suits filed for recovery of money based on promissory notes, seek to assail the correctness of the orders allowing the applications filed by the respondents/defendants purported to have been filed under Section 45 of the Evidence Act and Section 151 of C.P.C. with a prayer to send the promissory notes to an expert along with their specimen signatures and admitted signatures on cheques, vakalats and written statements for comparison and opinion. It is seen from the record that both the suits are filed for recovery of money based on promissory notes. The case of the defendants is total denial including the correctness and validity of the suit documents. In the circumstances, it is for the plaintiffs to take all such proceedings to prove the alleged transaction. But the defendants cannot avail such exercise for sending the suit documents to the expert taking over the burden. This Court has already taken a view that the defendant, in a suit for recovery of money based on promissory note where there is a total denial, cannot invoke Section 45 of the Evidence Act. In view of the same, the very exercise sought to be done by the respondents/defendants is wholly misconceived and unsustainable except for delaying the proceedings in the Court below. Therefore, both the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed and both the impugned orders are set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J 15th July, 2010 CVRK