THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.2771 of 2014 Between:
Dated 03rd September, 2014 Sri Goti Venkateswar Rao And Smt.G.Laxmi and others …Petitioner …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S.Vijay Prashanth Counsel for the respondents: ----
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This civil revision petition is filed against order, dated 22.07.2014, in I.A.No.468 of 2014, in O.S.No.873 of 2001, on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District.
The petitioner filed the above-mentioned suit for partition of the suit schedule properties. The suit was initially dismissed. Later, A.S.No.117 of 2014 filed by the petitioner was allowed and the case was remanded by the learned II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District permitting the parties to raise additional pleadings and also adduce additional evidence, if necessary, with regard to authenticity of Exs.B1 and B2, Wills, set up by defendant No.4. After remand, defendant No.4 has filed an application for sending the Wills set up by him for the opinion of Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) and the FSL has sent its report which is evidently against the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed I.A.No.468 of 2014 under Order XVI Rules 2 and 6 for summoning the Sub-Registrar, Uppal to produce the records of execution and Attestation Register of Ex.B2. The said application was dismissed by the lower Court by the order under revision.
I have heard Sri S.Vijay Prashanth, learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record.
As rightly observed by the lower Court, the initial burden lies on defendant No.4, who has set up the Wills, to prove the same. The suit is of the year 2001 and it was once dismissed. If the petitioner had any bona fides on his side, he would not have waited till receipt of report of the FSL. As rightly observed by the lower Court, as the FSL report was against the petitioner, he has come out with the present application. In my opinion, the lower Court has not committed any irregularity or jurisdictional error in dismissing the application of the petitioner. The petitioner is entitled to adduce his own evidence and also contest the contents of FSL report which is only an opinion having persuasive value and the lower Court is accordingly directed to take its own decision based on the report and the evidence that may be produced by both the parties.
Subject to the above observations, the civil revision petition is dismissed.
As a sequel to dismissal of the civil revision petition, C.R.P.M.P.No.3826 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 03rd September, 2014
VGB