Registration Of FIR Is Mandatory If Information Ex Facie Discloses Commission Of  Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court 'No Res Judicata': Supreme Court Holds Rejection Of Section 156(3) CrPC Plea Is No Bar To Subsequent Registration Of FIR Auto Dealers' Referral Charges From Banks & Insurers Constitute 'Business Auxiliary Service', But No Penalty If Tax Paid Before Show Cause Notice: Supreme Court MACT | Appellate Courts Must Liberally Admit Additional Evidence Under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC To Compute 'Just Compensation': Supreme Court MACT | Post-Accident Vehicle Position On Sketch Cannot Be Sole Basis To Infer Contributory Negligence: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation To ₹50.8 Lakhs 'Sanction Under Section 19(1)(c) PC Act Must Be Granted By Removing Authority': Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction Mere Recovery Of Money Cannot Resurrect Prosecution Proof Of Demand Is Sine Qua: Supreme Court Lok Adalat Awards Without Signatures Of All Rival Claimants Are Invalid, Order I Rule 8 CPC Inapplicable: Supreme Court Lok Adalat Cannot Decide Title Disputes, Mere Physical Possession Doesn't Prove Ownership": Supreme Court Quashes Land Acquisition Awards Power Discoms Can't Escape Liability: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Damages For Death Caused By Snapped Live Wires Lying On Ground Extra-Judicial Confessions To Village Administrative Officers Cannot Be Accepted As Gospel Truth Without Signatures And Corroboration: Madras High Court Acquits Murder Accused 'Article 21 Trumps UAPA Rigors': Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To PFI Members After 5 Years In Jail Due To 'Sluggish' Trial" Daughters Cannot Be Denied Equal Share: Orissa High Court Upholds Compensation Apportionment In Favor Of Daughters Under Hindu Succession Act Cannot Reopen Closed Chapter Years Later: Calcutta High Court Dismisses BSF Ex-Head Constable's Plea Claiming Voluntary Retirement Was Extracted Under Coercion Long-Standing Relationship And Public Recognition Prove Valid Marriage: Karnataka High Court Upholds Second Wife's Right To 1/3rd Share In Property Collector Becomes Functus Officio Once Duty Is Determined: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Penalty On Stamp Duty Deficiency Eyewitness Testimony Contradicted By Medical Evidence Cannot Sustain Murder Conviction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Woman In IPC 302 Case

Dismisses Appeal - report of the handwriting and finger print expert is an opinion which is not binding on the court – P&H HC

04 September 2024 10:28 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed an appeal in a land dispute case, affirming the findings of the lower courts. The appeal, titled RSA-489 of 2013 (O&M), was filed by the defendants, Davinder Singh and another individual, challenging the decision of the trial court. Justice Kshetarpal stated, "The report of the handwriting and finger print expert is an opinion which is not binding on the court. In the present case, direct evidence, namely the statement of the marginal witness as well as scribe, proved the execution of the agreement to sell. In such circumstances, the conclusion of the courts below does not require interference."

The dispute centered around the specific performance of an agreement to sell a property. The defendants claimed that the agreement was a forged document, alleging collusion between the plaintiffs and their commission agents. However, the High Court, presided over by Justice Anil Kshetarpal, rejected these claims and upheld the lower courts' findings.

Justice Kshetarpal stated, "The report of the handwriting and finger print expert is an opinion which is not binding on the court. In the present case, direct evidence, namely the statement of the marginal witness as well as scribe, proved the execution of the agreement to sell. In such circumstances, the conclusion of the courts below does not require interference."

The court further addressed the discrepancy in payment details, noting that it was natural for memories to fade over time. However, it emphasized the existence of a written contract that acknowledged the receipt of a substantial amount. The agreement was executed on a non-judicial stamp paper, which further supported the validity of the contract.

With the court upholding the concurrent findings of the lower courts, the appeal was dismissed. The High Court stated that no grounds for interference were established. This ruling brings closure to the land dispute case and affirms the enforceability of the agreement to sell the property.

This judgement highlights the importance of direct evidence and the court's discretion in evaluating expert opinions. The decision also emphasizes the significance of written contracts in establishing the intent and validity of agreements.

Date of Decision: 05.07.2023

Davinder Singh and another vs Mehal Singh and others 

Latest Legal News