IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5773 OF 2009 Between: Pasupuleti Janardhan Kumar, S/o. Hussain Setty ..... PETITIONER AND Simha Ratnam Prasad, S/o. Simha Yesuratnam ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5773 OF 2009 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel. 2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 18.12.2009 and granted interim stay for a limited period. 3. The civil revision petition is filed against the order, dated 10.11.2009, in I.A.No.1044 of 2009 in A.S.No.11 of 2007 on the file of III Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal. 4. The said application was filed under Order 26 Rule 10-A read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure praying for the relief to send the disputed document i.e., Ex.B1 along with the admitted documents to the Expert for comparison and report. 5. The respective stands taken by the parties in the affidavit filed in support of the application and the counter had been referred to by the learned Judge and after formulating the point for consideration at paragraph No.3, the learned Judge recorded reasons at paragraph Nos.4 to 6 and ultimately dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the same the present civil revision petition had been preferred. 6. The learned Judge at paragraph No.6 recorded the under noted reasons: “6. There is no dispute that the petitioner has filed the suit basing on Ex.B1, receipt allegedly executed by the respondent which was denied by the respondent. Accordingly while the suit was pending for trial, the petitioner filed the petition vide I.A.No.57/2006 for sending Ex.B1 along with the admitted signatures of the respondent to the Expert for comparison and having filed the same, subsequently he filed a memo not pressing the petition. The plea of the petitioner is that, expecting that the Expert may return the document without giving opinion he did not press the petition and after the lower court disposed off the suit by dismissing it, the petitioner came forward with this petition to send Ex.B1 with the same admitted documents to the Expert for comparison. Thereby once the petitioner having expected that the Expert may not given opinion on the documents with regard to the genuineness of Ex.B1 and got dismissed the petition by way of not pressing the same, he cannot file the present petition for the same relief at the stage of appeal which seems to be filed only to fill up the gaps and delay the proceedings.” and ultimately the application was dismissed. 7. In the light of the convincing reasons recorded by the learned Judge this Court is satisfied that the order under challenge does not suffer from any illegality whatsoever. 8. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition shall stand dismissed at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ P.S. NARAYANA, J February 03, 2010 MD