S CHINNATHAI Vs. K C CHINNADURAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision has been filed by the defendant in the suit, challenging the dismissal of the application filed in I.A. No. 402 of 2006 in O.S. No. 685 of 2003, wherein, the petitioner has sought for the report of the Forensic Expert by comparing the alleged signature of the petitioner found in the suit agreement with that of the vakalat, written statement and Exhibit A-6, sale deed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner herein, is the defendant in the suit. The suit is filed for specific performance based upon the agreement signed by the petitioner. Pending the suit filed in O.S. No. 685 of 2003, an application was filed by the petitioner seeking a report of the Forensic Expert for comparison of signatures. The said application was dismissed by the Court below, holding that Exhibit A-1 cannot be compared with the vakalat, written statement and Exhibit A-6, being a xeror copy of the sale deed. The Court below also dismissed the application on the ground of delay. Challenging the same, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition.

(3.) In order to appreciate the contention of the parties, the provisions contended in Order 26 Rule 10A of the Code of Civil Procedure need to be looked into. Order 26 Rule 10A of the Code of Civil Procedure has been inserted by Act 104 of 1976. The said provision is extracted hereunder for useful reference: