V M SHANMUGAM Vs. KUMARASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order, dated 14.8.2009, made in I.A.No.904 of 2009, in A.S.No.138 of 2006, on the file of the I Additional District Court, Coimbatore.

(2.) The petitioner in the present Civil Revision Petition is the appellant, in A.S.No.138 of 2006. The petitioner had filed an interlocutory application, in I.A.No.904 of 2009, in A.S.No.138 of 2006, praying that the I Additional District Court, Coimbatore, may be pleased to call an expert to inspect the Will, dated 20.5.1988, marked as Exhibit A.1 and the licence and the plan marked as Exhibit B.10 and to compare the disputed signature of late Kuppusamy Gounder available in the said Will, along with the admitted signatures available in the licence and the plan, marked as Exhibit B.10.

(3.) The appellate Court, by its order, dated 14.8.2009, had dismissed the said application stating that the petitioner has no right to file the application, when the appeal itself is ripe for disposal. It has also been stated that the appeal has been pending for a long time. When the judgment of the appellate Court is of the year, 2006, the petitioner had not filed any application earlier. The application, in I.A.No.904 of 2009, had been filed only when the appeal had been posted for arguments. The filing of the application by the petitioner, belatedly, is with the mala fide intention of delaying the proceedings in the appeal, in A.S.No.138 of 2006. The appellate Court had further stated that the opinion obtained from a handwriting expert is not conclusive in nature, to prove the allegations made by the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner would have to prove his claims, by way of evidence.