7. (a) The plaintiff had brought the suit against the defendant for recovery of money. The defendant is resisting the said suit inter alia stating that the suit promissory note is a rank forgery. After the evidence of both the sides is closed, the defendant had filed the three applications. The I.A.No.506 of 2014 is filed to summon or send for the documents, i.e., withdrawal forms from the State Bank of India, Main Branch, Tirupati; The I.A.No.507 of 2014 is filed with a prayer to grant leave to file certain documents; And, the present I.A.No.508 of 2014 is filed to send the exhibit A1, the suit promissory note, and other documents to a handwriting expert for comparison of the signatures on all the documents and for furnishing a report with an opinion. As already noted, I.A.No.800 of 2013 filed earlier by the defendant for sending the exhibit A1, promissory note, and other documents said to be containing the signatures of the defendant was dismissed by the trial Court in April 2014. And, it appears that at that the time, the trial Court had observed that the documents, which are said to be containing the signatures of the defendant and which are offered for comparison are not of a period contemporaneous to the period of exhibit A1, the suit promissory note.
