S S CHAITRA VEVEK Vs. S P RAMU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has called into question the common order, dated 28-6-2016 (Annexure-G) passed by the Court of the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore on I.A. Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 16 in O.S. No. 6773 of 2008. The respondent/plaintiffs filed a suit for ejectment, damages, etc., against the petitioner. In the said suit proceedings, the petitioner-defendant filed I.A. No. 10 for reopening the case, I.A. No. 11 for sending certain documents to Forensic Laboratory or any other Government Laboratory for comparing the plaintiff's disputed signature with the admitted signature, I.A. No. 12 for receiving certain documents and I.A. No. 16 for refund of the Court fee paid on counter-claim.

(2.) Smt. M. Jyothi, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the I.A. Nos. 10 and 12 were filed, as certain documents were not in the possession of the petitioner. On obtaining them from the criminal proceedings, they are sought to be produced in the suit proceedings.

(3.) The learned Counsel submits that the I.A. No. 11 is filed seeking comparison of the plaintiff's disputed signature with the admitted signature to any Government agency. She submits that the report of the Governmental agency would have greater evidentiary value.