(1.) AGGRIEVED over fair and decreetal order dated 20.7.2006 made in I.A.No.477 of 2005 in O.S.No.171 of 2002 on the file of the Sub Court, Dharapuram, this civil revision petition is filed.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.171 of 2002 for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,35,434/- based on a promissory note said to have been executed by the respondent/defendant. Initially the suit was decreed exparte on 10.06.2004. Subsequently the petitioner has initiated execution proceedings in E.P.No.71 of 2004. The petitioner has also filed I.A.No.531 of 2002 for attachment of the property but the defendant has produced security. The said application was closed accepting the security furnished by the respondent/defendant. During the execution proceedings, the petitioner has filed a petition to set aside the exparte decree and the same was allowed thereafter the defendant/respondent has also filed I.A.No.477 of 2005 to send the promissory note for expert opinion on the ground that the signature found in the said promissory note does not belong to him and wanted to compare the said signature with the signature found in the written statement as well as in the vakalath. The learned Subordinate Judge allowed the same.
(3.) PER contra, Mrs.Rita Chandrasekaran, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that the opinion of the expert would clinch the issue whether the promissory note is genuine or forged.