IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2400 of 2010 Between: Kommanaboyina Muthaiah .. Petitioner AND Kolla Papa Rao .. Respondent The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2400 of 2010 ORDER: The Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed against the order, dated 09.02.2010, in I.A.No.472 of 2009 in O.S.No.2 of 2008, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Parchur, whereunder and whereby, the petition, filed by the petitioner, under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to send the Promissory Note, dated 08.12.2001, to the Government Handwriting Expert to examine the material alteration made with regard to year in part payment endorsement on the reverse of the suit promissory note, was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in order to save the limitation, the plaintiff materially altered the year of the part payment endorsement on the reverse of the promissory note as 2004, but originally, the part payment endorsement was made on 03.12.2003. A specific plea has been taken in the written statement and to substantiate the case of the petitioner/defendant, necessarily, the document has to be sent to a Government Expert to know whether there was any material alteration made with regard to year in part payment endorsement on the reverse of the suit promissory note. 3. There cannot be any dispute that when there is a material alteration in the promissory note or a negotiable instrument, it will go to the root of the case. Therefore, if the plea of the petitioner/defendant is substantiated with a specific pleading, the trial Court ought to have allowed the petition to send it to the expert for comparison. Therefore, one of the modes for proving the contention of the petitioner/defendant is to send the document to an expert for opinion with regard to the material alteration. 4. Hence, the impugned order, dated 09.02.2010, in I.A.No.472 of 2009 in O.S.No.2 of 2008, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Parchur, is set aside. The trial Court is directed to send the document to a Government Scientific Expert for opinion and report. 5. The Civil Revision Petition is allowed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU, J Date: 10th March, 2011 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2400 of 2010 Date: 10th March, 2011 KL