SHAIK HUSSAIN PEERA Vs. J SUSEELAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Respondents filed O.S. No. 434 of 2004 against the Deceased-1st Petitioner in the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool for declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. It was pleaded that the property was originally owned by late, J. Subrahmanyam, the husband of the 1st Respondent herein, and that the deceased-1st Petitioner was interfering with the possession of the property.

(2.) During the pendency of the suit, the sole Plaintiff (the 1st Petitioner) died and his legal representatives, the Petitioners 2 to 7 herein came on record. Apart from opposing the suit, they filed a counter-claim for specific performance of an agreement of sale, dated 29-07-1999, said to have been executed by late, Subrahmanyam. The Respondents disputed the genuinity of the signature on the agreement of sale. To overcome that, the Petitioners filed I.A. No. 49 of 2010, under Rules 1 and 2 of Order 16, read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer to summon the Manager of Kurnool District Cooperative Credit Bank, Dhone Branch, for production of "loan account No. 61/CMD". According to the Petitioners, late Subrahmanyam raised loan from the Cooperative Credit Bank and that the document therein would certainly contain his signature. Their effort was to procure such document, so that an application can be filed under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act. The application was opposed by the Respondents. The trial Court dismissed the I.A., through order dated 15-0-6-2010. Hence, this revision.

(3.) Heard Sri Roopesh Kumar Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners.