NARASIMHAN Vs. RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in O. S. No. 356 of 2000 on the file of the Court District Munsif, Tindivanam, is the revision petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition. This revision is directed against the order dated 17. 10. 2003 and made in I. A. No. 1187 of 2003 in O. S. No. 356 of 2000 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam, allowing the petition filed by the defendants for rejection of the documents Exs. A. 7 and Ex. A. 8 marked during cross-examination of D. W. 1.

(2.) IN the affidavit filed by the second defendant, it is stated that when he was cross-examined on 11. 9. 2003 by the learned counsel for the plaintiff, three documents were shown to him by the learned counsel and he stated in his evidence that the signature in the three documents, namely, rental receipts, look like that of the first defendant Kasinathan and they have been marked as Exs. A. 7 to A. 9. It is mentioned in Ex. A. 7 that the lease is for a period of three years, in Ex. A. 8 the lease is stipulated for a period of two years and Ex. A. 9 is also for lease. It is further stated that the signatures in Exs. A. 7 to A. 9 have been forged and, therefore, the petition has been filed seeking to reject the above said documents.

(3.) THE petition was opposed in the counter filed by the plaintiff stating that the above said documents were marked at the time of cross-examination of D. W. 1 and no objection was raised by him at that time and, therefore, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.