Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Kambhampati Srinivasa Rao vs Kambhampati Vishnu Vardhana Rao on 30 July, 2004
Equivalent citations: 2004(5)ALD93, 2004(5)ALT216
ORDER T. Meena Kumari, J.
1. This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 5-12-2003 passed in an unnumbered I.A. of 2003 in O.S. No.334 of 1999 by the Junior Civil Judge, Gannavaram, Krishna District.
2. The above interlocutory application was filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Rule 1, Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, to send the document i.e., Ex A-2 to another Telugu expert.
3. It is contended by the petitioner/ plaintiff that earlier he has filed an application before the Court below to refer Ex.A-2 document to an expert for his opinion. Later, the expert after examination of the documents has given his opinion and that the expert in his evidence during cross-examination deposed that he is a native of Maharastra and his mother tongue is Marathi. That he cannot read and write Telugu but he stated in his evidence that while examining the case he identified all the characteristics with the help of guide books available in the market.
4. In the background of the evidence deposed by the expert, the application filed by the petitioner herein, to refer Ex.A-2 document to the Telugu expert seems to be a bona fide one and the Court below ought to have referred the said document to an expert who is well versed in Telugu language.
5. In view of the evidence of the expert that he has no knowledge in Telugu, the Court below ought to have taken utmost care in sending the document for the opinion of the expert who is well versed in Telugu language.
6. Under the above circumstances, the impugned order dated 5-12-2003 passed in unnumbered I.A. of 2003 in O.S. No.334 of 1999, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Court below to dispose of the application filed by the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. However, it is made clear that the Court below shall dispose of the matter without being influenced by the opinion expressed by the Expert, DW.2, or, the evidence.
7. With the above said observation, the civil revision petition is disposed of.