HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA C.R.P. Nos. 5888, 5890, 5898 of 2009 and 5912 of 2009 DATE:11.03.2010 Between: M. Shankaramma and others … Petitioners And Vemula Venkateswarlu … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA C.R.P. Nos. 5888, 5890, 5898 of 2009 and 5912 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: Since both the parties to the revisions are same and the point involved in all the revisions is also one and the same, all the four revisions are disposed of together, by this common order. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the respondent herein filed O.S.Nos.59 of 2007, 60 of 2007, 61 of 2007, and 39 of 2008 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Nagarkurnool, against the petitioners herein, for recovery of money on the foot of promissory notes alleged to have been executed by the father of the petitioners during his life time. The promissory notes in question were sent to a fingerprint expert and the documents received from the Andhra Bank, Jataprole, for comparison and report. The expert has submitted reports in all the four suits, and during the course of trial, he was examined as a witness on behalf of the respondent-plaintiff. Questioning the genuineness of the reports of the fingerprint expert, the petitioners-defendants filed I.A.Nos. 545 of 2007 in O.S.No.59 of 2007, 546 of 2009 in O.S.No.60 of 2007, 547 of 2009 in O.S.No.61 of 2007 and 548 of 2009 in O.S.No.39 of 2008, with a prayer to refer the promissory notes and the documents to another expert for comparison and report. Having heard both sides and gone through the material available on record, the court below dismissed the said applications, by separate orders, dated 04.11.2009. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners-defendants preferred these revisions. 3. Heard both sides. 4. On an earlier occasion, at the instance of the respondent-plaintiff, the promissory notes and the documents received from the Andhra Bank, Jataprole, have been sent to a fingerprint expert and the expert sent reports opining that the thumb impressions of the father of the petitioners-defendants on the promissory notes are tallying with that of the thumb impressions on the documents received from the Andhra Bank, Jataprole. Further, the fingerprint expert has been put to a lengthy cross-examination, wherein he has categorically denied the suggestion put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioners-defendants that his reports are bogus, biased and they have innumerable discrepancies. Moreover, even without referring to the reports of the fingerprint expert, the court below can look into the promissory notes and the documents received from the bank and come to the conclusion as to whether the thumb impressions of the father of the petitioners on both the documents are tallying with each other or not. In the light of the above, I see no merits in these revisions. 5. Accordingly, all the civil revision petitions are dismissed. No costs. __________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 11th March, 2010 cbs HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA C.R.P. Nos. 5888, 5890, 5898 of 2009 and 5912 of 2009 (Dismissed) 11th March, 2010 CBS