THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5735 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner filed O.S.No.54 of 1998 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Nagarkurnool, against the 1st respondent, for recovery of certain amount, as rent, for the land said to have been leased to the latter. Nine years after filing of the suit, the petitioner filed I.A.No.360 of 2007, under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, with a prayer to send the lease deed, dated 25.04.1997, for the opinion of an Expert. The trial Court dismissed the I.A., through its order, dated 23.11.2007. Hence, this C.R.P. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Though notice was served upon the 1st respondent, he has not chosen to enter appearance. The petitioner based his claim, in the suit, upon the lease deed, dated 25.04.1997. The 1st respondent flatly denied the execution thereof. The petitioner ought to have proved the document by examining the witness and other persons connected with the documents. He has not chosen to do so. The record discloses that the petitioner did not even offer himself for being cross-examined. The suit was identified, and obviously, the trial Court was very much concerned about the disposal of the same. No exception can be taken to the order under revision. However, in stead of closing the avenue for examination of the document, it is felt that the trial Court can itself undertake comparison of the signature on the document, on the one hand, and the signature of the 1st respondent, upon the written statement and vakalat, on the other. If it still feels that the opinion of the expert is necessary, it can take steps for securing the report, at the earliest, duly imposing the necessary conditions. Hence, the C.R.P. is disposed of, upholding the order under revision, but directing that, in case, the trial Court, after undertaking comparison by itself, between the signatures on the lease deed, dated 25.04.1997, on the one hand, and the signature of the 1st respondent upon the written statement and vakalat, on the other, comes to the conclusion that the opinion of an Expert is needed, it shall take necessary steps. The petitioner shall complete his evidence within two weeks from the date of indication of the opinion by the trial Court, as directed above. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dated:09.09.2009 GJ