When the plaintiff has accepted the signature of the defendant as the admitted signature, there can be no objection to the Court to send the same for experts opinion. The present one is a converse case where the defendant himself wants his signatures available in the suit record to be treated as admitted signatures. The plaintiff cannot be put to the risk of sending such signatures for experts opinion unless he has agreed for the proposal of the defendant. As respondent No.1 objected to the petitioners request and in the absence of availability of admitted contemporaneous signatures, the lower Court has rightly rejected the petitioners request. Therefore, I do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the order of the lower Court for interference by this Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

When the plaintiff has accepted the signature of the defendant as the admitted signature, there can be no objection to the Court to send the same for experts opinion. The present one is a converse case where the defendant himself wants his signatures available in the suit record to be treated as admitted signatures. The plaintiff cannot be put to the risk of sending such signatures for experts opinion unless he has agreed for the proposal of the defendant. As respondent No.1 objected to the petitioners request and in the absence of availability of admitted contemporaneous signatures, the lower Court has rightly rejected the petitioners request. Therefore, I do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the order of the lower Court for interference by this Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

When the plaintiff has accepted the signature of the defendant as the admitted signature, there can be no objection to the Court to send the same for experts opinion. The present one is a converse case where the defendant himself wants his signatures available in the suit record to be treated as admitted signatures. The plaintiff cannot be put to the risk of sending such signatures for experts opinion unless he has agreed for the proposal of the defendant. As respondent No.1 objected to the petitioners request and in the absence of availability of admitted contemporaneous signatures, the lower Court has rightly rejected the petitioners request. Therefore, I do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the order of the lower Court for interference by this Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.