RAJENDRAN Vs. MALIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. V. Bharathidasan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Ramamoorthy, learned counsel for the respondent. The impugned order of the trial court and other documents produced in the form of typed set of papers are also perused.

(2.) This revision has been filed challenging the order of the learned District Munsif, Tiruvarur dated 11.01.2012 made in I.A.No. 612/2011 in O.S.No. 13/2010. The said suit was filed by the respondent herein against the revision petitioner for specific performance based on an Agreement for Sale dated 30.03.2002, allegedly executed by the revision petitioner in favour of the respondent herein/plaintiff.

(3.) The suit is hotly contested by the revision-petitioner herein/defendant contending that the suit sale agreement is a forged one. The petitioner/defendant filed an earlier application in I.A.No. 277/2011 before the trial court for referring the suit sale agreement dated 30.03.2012 for the opinion of a handwriting expert. The said petition came to be dismissed by an order dated 15.07.2011 holding that the prayer made in the said petition could not be granted, since the petitioner had not come forward to produce the documents containing the admitted or proved signatures of the petitioner, which could be used for making a comparison with the signature found in the disputed document.