PACKIAMMAL AND OTHERS Vs. THAIYANAYAKI AMMAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 26.01.2014 made in I.A.No.1019 of 2013 in O.S.No.132 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Ulundurpet.

(2.) The petitioners are the plaintiffs and respondents are the defendants in O.S.No.132 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Ulundurpet. The petitioners filed the said suit against the respondents for declaration and permanent injunction or in alternative, possession and damages. The respondents filed written statement on 13.10.2009. The petitioners filed I.A.No.1019 of 2013 under Order 75 (1) of Civil Rules of Practice to send the thumb impression to the expert to get the opinion through Advocate Commissioner in respect of the sale deeds dated 12.05.1962 and 24.05.1982. According to the petitioners, one Kasinathan Chettiar @ Rajmuthu Chetti, the husband of the first petitioner and father of the other petitioners has purchased the suit property by the sale deed dated 12.05.1962. He did not sell the property to anybody. He went to Bombay for his work. At that time, he leased out the suit property to one Narayana Chettiyar, who forged the signature and thumb impression of the husband of the first petitioner and created the forged sale deed dated 24.05.1982. Therefore, it is necessary to send the said thumb impression to the expert to get the opinion through Advocate Commissioner.

(3.) The third respondent filed counter affidavit and contended that in the written statement filed on 13.10.2009 itself, the third respondent has mentioned the sale deeds dated 12.05.1962 and 24.05.1982 and another sale deed dated 28.02.2008 executed by respondents 1 and 2 in his favour. After considerable delay, the petitioners have come out with the present application only to drag on the proceedings. The third respondent is willing to produce all the three documents before the Court and prayed for dismissal of the application.