CHIDELLA VENKATESWARLU Vs. GURRAM PUSHPA LATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against Order, dated 30-01-2012, in I.A. No. 928 of 2011 in O.S. No. 31 of 2008, on the file of the Court of the learned V Additional District Judge, Ongole. The petitioner is defendant No. 1 in the above-mentioned suit filed by respondent No.1 for recovery of certain amount based on a pronote. In the midst of the trial, after the petitioner was examined as DW.1, respondent No.1 has filed IA. No. 928 of 2011 under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for short 'the Act'), for sending the suit pronote for opinion of a handwriting expert by comparing the signature on the pronote with the admitted signature of the petitioner on the written statement The petitioner has objected to the said application mainly on the ground that the same is belated and that it is not possible to compare the signature on the written statement, which was subscribed six years after the alleged execution of the suit pronote. The lower Court, having discussed the case law, allowed the application of respondent No.1. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner/defendant No.1.

(2.) At the hearing, Sri Ch.C.Krishna Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the lower Court has not properly considered the judgment of this Court in Nimmagadda Padmanabha Rao vs. Smt. Kosaraju Satyavathi, 2006 AIR(AP) 233.

(3.) Under Section 45 of the Act, the opinion of an expert is a relevant fact. The law is well settled that such opinions are not binding on the Court. But, at the same time., the Court, which lacks expertise, will be guided by such opinions even though the final conclusion rests with it. No doubt in Nimmagadda Padmanabha Rao (1 supra), the learned single Judge of this Court has expressed the view that the pattern of signatures keeps changing and that it is not safe to rely upon a disputed signature, which was subscribed 16 years prior to the admitted signature. In Velaga Sivarama Krishna vs. Velaga Veerabhadra Rao and Another, 2009 1 ALD 265, another learned Judge observed as under: