C. GUNASEELAN Vs. VIJAYAKUMAR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Civil Revision Petitions are filed against the fair and decretal orders dated 13.11.2014 made in I.A. Nos.435 and 460 of 2014 in O.S.No.120 of 2012 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Ambur, Vellore District.

(2.) The petitioner is first defendant, first respondent is the plaintiff and second respondent is the second defendant in O.S.No.120 of 2012 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Ambur, Vellore District. The first respondent filed the said suit against the petitioner and second respondent for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 20.01.2004 and 12.03.2004 and for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner and second respondent from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The petitioner filed written statement on 17.04.2013 and is contesting the suit. The petitioner filed two applications against the respondents in I.A.No.435 of 2014 under Order 26, Rule 9 of C.P.C to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to send the Agreement of sale to the Forensic Department to get opinion of the handwriting expert and I.A.No.460 of 2014 under Order 7, Rule 14(3) of C.P.C to condone the delay in filing the documents to compare the disputed signature in the sale Agreements with the admitted signature. According to the petitioner, the agreement of sale based on which the first respondent filed the suit is not executed by him and the second respondent. The signatures in the document are not their signatures. Therefore, it is necessary to send the said documents to the Forensic Department to obtain opinion from the handwriting expert. The petitioner further stated that the three documents dated 27.12.1975, 13.05.1992 and 01.01.2014 were traced only recently. Those documents are necessary for comparison of disputed signature with admitted signature and prayed to condone the delay in filing those documents.

(3.) The respondents filed counter affidavit and denied all the allegations of the petitioner and submitted that the documents sought to be compared are not contemporaneous documents and therefore, it is not necessary to send the sale Agreements to Forensic Department for obtaining opinion from the handwriting expert.