LAWS(MAD)-2009-1-42

M KARUNANIDHI Vs. SEETHALAKSHMI

Decided On January 19, 2009
M. KARUNANIDHI Appellant
V/S
SEETHALAKSHMI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is filed against the order dated 22.2.2008 passed in I.A.No,219 of 2008 in O.S.No.111 of 2006 by the District Munsif, Kangkeyam, Erode District.) Animadverting upon the order dated 22.2.2008 passed in I.A.No,219 of 2008 in O.S.No.111 of 2006 by the District Munsif, Kangkeyam, Erode District, this revision petition is filed.

(2.) THE epitome and short and long of the facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision petition would run thus: THE respondent filed the suit O.S.No.111 of 2006 for recovery of money, based on pro-note. THE defendant, during the pendency of the suit, filed I.A.No,219 of 2008 seeking the relief of forwarding the photo copy of the impugned document along with the admitted signatures of the defendant to the expert for comparison and report. However, the lower Court dismissed it. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, this revision petition is focussed on various grounds:

(3.) AT this juncture, I am of the opinion that even though the burden of proof is on the respondent/plaintiff to prove the case, the petitioner/defendant, in order to buttress and fortify his stand, can ask for sending the impugned document for comparison. However, there are certain well settled guidelines to be followed. In this case, both the purported signature as well as the purported left thumb impression of the petitioner/defendant are found in the impugned pro-note and in such a case it is just and proper for the Court to send the impugned signature and the left thumb impression for comparison, so as to compare them with the anti litum motem signature of the petitioner/defendant and also with the sample left thumb impression of the petitioner/defendant concerned. Hence, at the first instance, the petitioner/defendant shall secure before the Court his own one or two anti motum litem signatures before the Court and also furnish his left thumb impression whereupon, the lower Court shall appoint an Advocate Commissioner for the following purpose.