Judgment :- Animadverting upon the order dated 17.03.2008 passed by the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Gobichettipalayam in I.A.No.167 of 2007 in O.S.No.403 of 2002, this civil revision petition is focussed. 2. Heard both sides. 3. A "resume" of facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision petition would run thus: The petitioner filed the suit O.S.No.403 of 2002 seeking specific performance of the agreement to sell. Twice ex parte decree was passed. However, the respondent/defendant got the ex parte decrees set aside and now the matter is pending before the lower Court for being decided on merits. Since the defendant categorically denied his signature in the suit agreement to sell, the plaintiff did choose to get the experts assistance and to that effect I.A.No.167 of 2007 was filed before the lower Court, which simply dismissed it on the ground of delay only. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of the lower Court, this revision petition is focussed on various grounds. 4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would develop his argument placing reliance on the grounds of revision to the effect that once the defendant disputed the signature in the suit agreement to sell, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove the genuineness of the signature and with that intention alone I.A.No.167 of 2007 was filed to take the assistance of an expert, but the trial Court unjustifiably dismissed it. 5. I could see considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in those circumstances, the Court should not have dismissed the application. However, I would like to observe the following for the guidance of the petitioner as well as the lower Court. Whenever an impugned signature or handwriting is sent for expert opinion, the anti litum motem writing/signature should also be made available before the lower Court and the lower Court should send it to the expert as per law for being compared. Hence I direct the petitioner to secure at the first instance the anti litum motem signature of the petitioner before the Court, whereupon, the lower Court shall appoint an Advocate Commissioner for the following purpose. Hence I direct the petitioner to secure at the first instance the anti litum motem signature of the petitioner before the Court, whereupon, the lower Court shall appoint an Advocate Commissioner for the following purpose. .(a) To carry the relevant documents in connection with this case personally in a sealed cover; .(b) and produce the same before the Forensic Expert; .(c) leave it in his custody under his acknowledgment for as many days as the Forensic Expert may require; .(d) collect the record from the Forensic Expert on the day as may be fixed by him; (e) bring it back and lodge it with the Court." The Forensic Expert is directed to complete the examination of the records in any event, within 48 hours after the depositing of the same by the Advocate Commissioner with him. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.