High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging a Subordinate Judge's order that refused a review application to submit a disputed sale agreement for handwriting expert opinion, holding no error appeared on the face of the order.
The civil revision petition is dismissed. The review application by the petitioner fails.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 06..12.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
Civil Revision Petition No.2357 of 2015
and
M.P.No.1 of 2015
S.Balakrishnan ... Petitioner/Plaintiff
-Versus-
1.M.Ponnusamy 2.P.Santhamani ... Respondents /Defendant
Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order and decretal order dated 09.04.2015 made in I.A.No.273 of 2015 in I.A.No.380 of 2014 in O.S.No.186 of 2010 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Perundurai.
For Petitioner : Mr.L.Mouli For Respondent(s) : No Appearance
ORDER
This revision petition is directed against the order of dismissal of the interlocutory application whereby the court below has refused to review its earlier order, not accepting the petitioner's prayer to forward the sale agreement in question containing the disputed signature for comparison by a hand writing expert with the admitted signatures of the 1st defendant.
containing the admitted signatures of the 1st defendant which are contemporaneous to the sale agreement in question. Therefore, he had to file an application to review the earlier order refusing to forward the disputed sale agreement for expert opinion. The grievance of the petitioner is that court below without considering the case of the petitioner had come to an erroneous conclusion that the petitioner though the contemporaneous documents were in his possession, he had not taken any diligent steps to produce the same and dismissed the application.
In the result, this civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected MP is closed.
Sub Assistant Registrar
kmk
To
The Subordinate Judge, Perundurai, Erode District.
Civil Revision Petition
No.2357 of 2015
ca[co]
srg 22/01/2020
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order dismissing the review application refusing expert opinion on signature comparison was erroneous.
Whether sufficient ground existed to review the earlier order admitting the petitioner's failure to produce contemporaneous documents.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Balakrishnan
1.M.Ponnusamy
2.P.Santhamani
V.Bharithidasan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
