The petitioners (plaintiffs in the original suit) filed two Civil Revision Petitions before the Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging orders dated 24.07.2025 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gooty, in I.A.Nos.402 and 403 of 2024 in O.S.No.22 of 2024. The underlying suit sought specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 11.02.1991, with the defendants denying execution and alleging forgery. The plaintiffs sought to have the 1st defendant's thumb impression taken in court and the agreement sent to a handwriting/fingerprint expert for comparison, but the trial court dismissed both applications on the grounds that the document was not yet marked, substantial issues were not framed, and the matter was premature. The High Court found that the trial court's reasoning did not withstand legal scrutiny, noting that identification of thumb impressions is an exact science (relying on Jaspal Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1979 SC 1708), and that sending the document to an expert for comparison would assist the court in adjudicating the dispute.