(1.) By way of present petition, the petitioner herein has challenged the order passed below Exh.13 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Deesa, whereby, the application below Exh.13 for sending the promissory note to FSL under Order XXVI Rule 10-A of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 and the application below Exh.21 seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, came to be rejected by a common order dtd. 18/12/2021.
(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner herein is the original defendant and the opponent is the original plaintiff in the Special Summary Suit No.4 of 2019 inter-alia demanding Rs.25,00,000.00 on the basis of a bogus, fake, wrong, unstamp, forged promissory note. The petitioner herein preferred application below Exh.13 stating that the opponent - original plaintiff was wanting to harass the petitioner - original defendant by filing the suit-in-question. The said suit according to the petitioner- original defendant, is based on forged, false and vexatious document i.e. a so called promissory note dtd. 31/1/2016. By preferring the application below Exh.13, it is contended by the petitioner - original defendant that the promissory note-in-question is required to be investigated by hand-writting expert under Order XXVI Rule 10-A of the CPC. For the aforesaid reason, it is prayed by the petitioner herein to pass an order appointing expert/Commissioner for conducting scientific investigation through Forensic Science Laboratory to investigate the promissory note which, according to the petitioner - original defendant, is fake and forged. The application below Exh.21, which is filed under Order VII Rule 11 seeking rejection of plaint, came to be rejected by the concerned Court and the same is also subject matter of challenge before this Court.
(3.) Heard Mr. Shailesh Raval, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Manav Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the respondent.