1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5621 OF 2009 (Mahadeo P. Gedam and others ...versus... Balu Ramkrushna Girhe) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : MARCH 31, 2010. Heard Mr. S.A.Mohta, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. V.K.Paliwal, the learned counsel for the respondent. It is apparent that the petitioner/defendant had an opportunity to prove the signature of respondent/ plaintiff on Exh.83 before the trial court. That opportunity was not utilized. Perusal of paragraphs 13 and 14 of the judgment of the trial court show that the trial court has made some categorical observations about Sale Deed at Exh.67. In this situation, in appeal, the petitioner/ defendant wanted to cure that lacuna by seeking opinion of the Handwriting Expert on the signature of plaintiff on Exh.83. The appellate court has rightly rejected that application. I do not find any jurisdictional error or perversity. Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE Diwale