THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NOS.3574,3581 AND 3632 OF 2007 DT.17.06.2010 Between Nyna Satyavathi …………Petitioner Vs. Rajendramani Devi and three others ………………..Respondents. (Parties in all the three revision petitions are one and the same.) O R D E R: Since common questions are involved and parties are one and the same in all the three revision petitions, they are being taken up together and are being disposed of at the instance of both the learned counsel. The petitioner who is plaintiff in all the three suits filed the present revision petitions aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.Nos.174 of 2006 in O.S.No.16 of 2001, I.A.No.175 of 2006 in O.S.No.21 of 2000 and I.A.No.169 of 2006 in O.S.No.88 of 2000 respectively, dated 05.07.2007 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Salur, whereby the applications filed by the petitioner in I.A.Nos.174 and 175 of 2006 under Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act read with Section 151 of C.P.C., seeking to send the documents containing the disputed signatures of defendant No.1 with the admitted signatures of defendant No.1 along with other documents and another application in I.A.No.169 of 2006 filed under Sections 129 and 151 of C.P.C., seeking to send for the register of executants signature and thumb impressions pertaining to June 1991 from the Office of Sub- Registrar, Salur were dismissed by the court below on the ground that the documents are not contemporaneous. Having heard Sri V.V.L.N.Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.Vidya Sagar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents and also perusing the record placed before this court, it is seen that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the parties are one and the same defendant No.1 is also same in all the three suits, but the cause of action is different in all the three matters. Further, no attempt has been made on either side to club the three suits,. In the circumstances of the case, I think that it is quite desirable to club all the three suits together. Hence, the revision petitions are allowed. The order dated 05.07.2007 passed in I.A.Nos.174, 175 and 169 of 2006 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the court below to club all the three suits together and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The court below is also directed to pass orders afresh in all the three applications, after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties and also on merits. No order as to costs. _________________ B.PRAKAKSH RAO J., Dt..17.06.2010 tjs