APHC010577672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] FRIDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2977/2025 Between: KANDIMALLA MADHUSUDHAN, S/O. SUNDARAIAHNAIDU, AGED 52 YEARS, R/O. THIKKAVARAPADU VILLAGE, VENKATACHALAM MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND SAKMURI GEETHA, W/o. Sakamuri Srinivasulu, Aged 43 years, R/o. Flat No. 302-A, Green Woods Apartment, Dargamitta, Nellore Town. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SARANU PHANI TEJA 2 C.R.P.No.2977 of 2025 KSR,J The Court made the following ORDER :- Aggrieved by the Orders passed in I.A.No.364 of 2025 in O.S.No.781 of 2023 on the file of the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nellore, dated 01.05.2025, the petitioner/defendant filed the present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The respondent herein filed suit in O.S.No.781 of 2023 for recovery of certain amount on the basis of promissory note-Ex.A.1. Pending suit, the petitioner/defendant filed I.A.No.364 of 2025 under Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act, seeking to send Ex.A.1-promissory note to the hand writing expert for comparison of her signature. 3. After elaborate discussion, learned Junior Civil Judge dismissed I.A.No.364 of 2025 on the following grounds :- “10. As rightly contended by the counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, the petitioner/defendant did not file any document containing his admitted signatures except filing this petition vaguely seeking to send Ex.A1 promissory note for expert opinion and without furnishing the authenticated signatures of the petitioner/defendant, this petition does not serve any purpose. As the petitioner/defendant has not produced into the Court, along with his petition, any authentic documents containing his admitted signatures of a contemporaneous or any other period, this court has not find any valid reasons to send the suit promissory notes for expert opinion. Thus, this point is answered against the petitioner/defendant.” 3 C.R.P.No.2977 of 2025 KSR,J 4. Now the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present Civil Revision Petition, with a liberty to the petitioner/defendant to approach the trial Court by filing a petition along with her contemporaneous signatures. 5. Granting liberty as sought for, the present Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____ K.SURESH REDDY, J Dt. 14.11.2025 SAB 4 C.R.P.No.2977 of 2025 KSR,J 35 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2977 OF 2025 Dt. 14.11.2025 SAB