Exhibit-B3 document for expert opinion. When Exhibit-P5 I.A. was taken, it was observed that Exhibit-B3 is a voluminous record and there will be lot of inconvenience in sending such a voluminous record for expert analysis by the expert agency for further opinion. In these circumstances the petitioners have also filed Exhibit-P6 I.A.No.5140 of 2017 in Exhibit-P5 I.A.No.6183 of 2016 in the above O.S., praying that only some randomly selected pages, ten in number, from Exhibit-P3 document may alone be sent for expert opinion to verify whether the same is written in the handwriting of the first respondent or not in order to avoid any inconvenience in dealing with such voluminous record. Now the court below, as per the impugned Exhibit-P10 order, without considering all the relevant aspects in the proper perspective, has dismissed the prayer in Exhibits-P5 and P6 I.As. The present Original Petition (Civil) has been filed to impugn the said Exhibit-P10 order rendered on 3.1.2018. Various submissions have been made by Sri.K.C.Eldho, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, to support his prayer against the impugned order. This Court is of the view that notice to the respondents to be dispensed with in the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this case without entering into the merits of the controversy. It is seen that the main reasoning given by the trial court for rejecting the applications as per the impugned Exhibit-
