Item- A- 1258. sg 17-08-2026 Ct. 6 CO 4465 of 2025 Nanda Nayak @ Sadananda Nayak Versus Jayasree Ghosh Mr. Ashim Ghoshal Mr. Supriyo Ghosh Ms. Susmita Adhikary Mr. Sandipan Dinda …for the petitioner This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the defendant and is directed against an order being Oder No. 116 dated 26th August, 2025 passed by the learned Judge, 3rd Bench, Presidency Small Cause Court, Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 377 of 2008. By the order impugned, the application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure at the instance of the petitioner for appointment of a handwriting expert stood rejected. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the vakalatnama and the plaint of the instant suit were not supplied to the handwriting expert. After going through the order impugned, this Court finds that the learned Trial Judge has specifically recorded that the original money receipt produced by the defendant, the original vakalatnama of the plaintiff, the rent receipt issued by the plaintiff were sent for comparison before the handwriting expert and the expert already submitted a report. The learned Trial Judge after noting that the report of the expert is already on record, rejected the application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure upon holding that the petitioner is trying to delay the hearing of the 2 suit. Since the documents were sent to the handwriting expert for comparison and the report has already been submitted by the expert, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order rejecting the application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. For the reasons as aforesaid, this civil revisional application stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)