A PACHIAPPAN Vs. R CHINAIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner is the defendant in the suit o. S. No. 206 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif, Palladam filed by the respondent/plaintiff for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 75,545/- based on the suit promissory note dated 10. 06. 1998 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 50,000/ -. THE defendant filed his written statement denying the very execution of the suit promissory note. THE suit was ripe for trial and P. Ws. 1 and 2 were examined and Ex. A1 was marked on the side of the plaintiff. At this stage, the petitioner/defendant filed the application in i. A. No. 1230 of 2006 praying to send the document Ex. P. 1 the suit promissory note dated 10. 06. 1999 for the expert opinion for the reason that the said promissory note was written with three different inks, in different hand writing. THE court below after hearing both sides dismissed the said application. Aggrieved over the said order, the petitioner/defendant has filed the above civil revision petition.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

(3.) IN the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. Consequently, connected M. P. is also dismissed. No costs. .