HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.289 OF 2010 DATE:05-02-2010 BETWEEN Kunapareddy Srinivas …Petitioner AND Gundumogula Suresh …Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.289 OF 2010 ORDER: Plaintiff is in revision under Article 227 of Constitution of India questioning the correctness of the orders of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kothapeta, East Godavari District, dated 29.12.2009 in I.A.No.1189 of 2009 in O.S.No.137 of 2007. The revision petitioner instituted the above suit for recovery of money basing on a pronote. Contesting the suit, the defendant- respondent herein earlier filed I.A.No.950 of 2009 for appointment of a commissioner for the purpose of examining the handwriting expert to whom the suit promissory note was sent for comparison and opinion. As the said advocate-commissioner did not execute the warrant, that I.A. was dismissed. On dismissal of said I.A., the respondent-defendant filed the impugned I.A. for appointment of an advocate-commissioner for recording the evidence of handwriting expert. The lower Court while dismissing the impugned I.A. observed that the defendant-respondent herein can examine the handwriting expert in the Court by paying necessary process fee and witness beta including the traveling expenses as per the rules. Feeling aggrieved by such permission granted to the defendant to examine the handwriting expert, the present revision is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that once the earlier I.A.No.950 of 2009 filed by the defendant-respondent was dismissed for non-execution of the warrant, again permitting the defendant to examine the handwriting expert amounts to recalling the earlier order, which is impermissible under law. I see no force in the said submission. The dismissal of I.A.No.950 of 2009, which was filed to examine the handwriting expert on commission, will not debar the defendant to examine the said expert on being summoned in the Court by paying necessary process fee. Inasmuch as the petitioner will have an opportunity to cross- examine the handwriting expert in the event of he being summoned and examined by the Court, the impugned order will not occasion failure of justice. No infirmity or illegality is discernable with the impugned order. The revision fails and is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage. No costs. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. FEBRUARY 05, 2009 Tsr.