APHC010623262023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] SATURDAY ,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3310/2023 Between: Vemuiapalli Paravathi, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Smt Vemulapalli Seetharavamma ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K J DAYANAND KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3310/2023 ORDER: The present Civil Revision Petition is filed being aggrieved by the Order dated 29.09.2023 in I.A.No.141 of 2023 in O.S.No.198 of 2016 passed by the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada. 2. The Petitioners are the Defendants. A suit was filed by the Respondent/Plaintiff for declaration that she is the absolute owner of the Suit Schedule Property pursuant to a Will dated 15.05.2003 executed by her husband Vemulapalli Radha Krishna Murthy and for consequential permanent injunction restraining the Defendants and their men from entering into the schedule property. 3. During pendency of the suit, an application was filed by the Defendants seeking to send the suit document Ex.A.3— Unregistered Will dated 15.05.2023 for expert opinion to determine whether there is double thumb impression on Ex.A.3 or not. 4. On contest, the trial Court allowed the same, but curiously observed at paragraph No. 9 of impugned Order that Ex.A.3 Will be sent along with admitted thumb impression of the Plaintiff for the contemporaneous period for comparison with the fingerprint Expert, APFSL, Amaravati. Questioning the same, the present Civil Revision Petition. 3 5. Heard Sri K.J. Dayanand Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarthy, learned counsel for the Respondent. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that the relief sought in the said Interlocutory Application and the order of the trial Court at paragraph No.9 of the impugned order are inconsistent and there is no requirement of comparing the thumb impressions of the Plaintiff while sending Ex.A.3 to fingerprint Expert. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent also submitted that there is no requirement of sending Ex.A.3 along with admitted thumb impressions of the Plaintiff for contemporaneous period of Ex.A.3 for comparison. 8. Having heard the respective counsel and upon perusing of the material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the observation of the trial Court at paragraph No.9 directing to send Ex.A.3 along with admitted thumb impressions of the Plaintiff for the contemporaneous period of Ex.A.3 for comparison appears to be not in consonance with the relief sought as the thumb impressions of the husband of the Plaintiff on Ex.A.3 is in dispute. Therefore, the Order of the trial Court is modified as under: Ex.A.3 be sent to the Fingerprint Expert at APSFL, Mangalagiri to examine whether there is a double thumb impression on Ex.A.3 or not and submit a report to the trial Court. As the Report from the Fingerprint Expert may take some 4 time, this Court is of the opinion that the trial Court may proceed with the trial after keeping the Certified Copy of Ex.A.3 Will. 9. With the above observation, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 13-02-2025 eha 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CRP No.3310 of 2023 Dt.13-02-2025 U eha