THOTAKURA RAM SURESH Vs. VELPULA MASTANAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the Order, dtd. 13/2/2024 passed in I.A.No.821 of 2023 in O.S.No.1087 of 2021 by the I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ongole, (hereinafter referred to, as 'the trial Court') filed under Sec. 45 of the Evidence Act, 1872 (for brevity 'the Act'), the petitioner herein/defendant preferred the present Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the respondent herein/ plaintiff filed O.S.No.1087 of 2021 against the petitioner herein/ defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs.7,66,100.00 basing on a promissory note, dtd. 1/3/2017 alleged to have executed by the petitioner herein/defendant in favour of the respondent herein/plaintiff for a sum of Rs.5,00,000.00, agreeing to repay with interest at 24% per annum. During pendency of the suit, the petitioner herein/defendant filed an application under Sec. 45 of the Act and Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity 'CPC') before the trial Court seeking to send Ex.A1/promissory note along with Ex.A2/part payment endorsement to the Expert for comparison. The trial Court having gone through the entire material on record, dismissed the application observing that the petitioner herein/defendant did not furnish any contemporary signatures or any writing to compare with the disputed signatures. Aggrieved by the said impugned Order, the present Civil Revision Petition was filed.

(3.) It is the contention of petitioner herein/defendant that the alleged signatures and writings of the petitioner herein/defendant on Ex.A1/promissory note and Ex.A2/part payment endorsement are forged and prior to filing of the suit, the said plea was taken in reply notice sent the by the petitioner herein/defendant to the respondent herein/plaintiff besides contending in written statement.