S. SYAMALA DEVI Vs. KANTAM LEELAVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) Petitioner is defendant in O.S. No. 32 of 2004 pending on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor. The said suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale was filed by the respondent and it appears that the evidence in the suit on both sides was closed on 10.07.2015 and since then suit is coming up for arguments and the respondent's/plaintiff's counsel is stated to have argued the matter and filed written arguments also on 06.08.2015. Meanwhile, petitioner herein filed I.A.No.601 of 2013 seeking to send Ex.A1 to the handwriting expert to compare the arithmetic insertions in the said Ex.A1 for comparison with the signature of P.W.1 in his vakalat and the deposition. The said application came to be dismissed under the impugned order dated 14.09.2015, primarily, on the ground that petitioner has not raised any such plea of alteration in the written statement and that the petitioner did not evince any interest to argue the I.A. since 2013 and the said application is merely to delay and protract the trial of the suit.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has questioned the said order by placing reliance upon paragraph 14 of the written statement wherein petitioner has raised a plea of fabrication of Ex.A1 and the docket proceedings in I.A.No.601 of 2013 which show that it was filed on 02.07.2013 and is coming up for counter and thereafter for enquiry. But on various dates it was adjourned as the staff was on strike and could not be taken up. It is also recorded in the proceedings that both sides not ready on many occasions. Learned counsel submits that the court below took up the I.A. and heard the said I.A. on 26.08.2015 and dismissed the same on 14.09.2015.