Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE – DISMISSED – FAILED TO EXAMINE HANDWRITING EXPERT IN PROVING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT – PH HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed an appeal and highlighted the crucial role of a handwriting expert in establishing the execution of an agreement and stated that “The plaintiff indeed omitted examining a handwriting expert... Without such examination, the case of the plaintiff suffered a big jolt.” The case, RSA-3421 of 2012 (O&M), involved a dispute between Bakshish Singh and Kanwaljit Singh and another party.

The court, presided over by Justice H.S. Madaan, emphasized that the plaintiff, Bakshish Singh, failed to prove the execution of the agreement to sell the land in question. The judgment stated, “The plaintiff indeed omitted examining a handwriting expert. If such an expert, after examining the disputed signatures of Kanwaljit Singh with his specimen/admitted signatures, had arrived at the conclusion that those were by the same person, that would have strengthened the case of the plaintiff.”

The court further noted that the agreement’s execution was not established, and therefore, the question of granting specific performance did not arise. The trial court’s judgment, which had decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, was deemed erroneous. The appellate court correctly set aside the trial court’s decision and dismissed the suit.

Justice Madaan, while upholding the appellate court’s judgment, remarked, “The execution of agreement Ex.P1 is not established on the record; therefore, there is no question of any specific performance thereof being granted in favor of the appellant/plaintiff.”

The importance of a handwriting expert in establishing the authenticity of signatures on legal documents was highlighted in the judgment. The court underscored that in cases where a party denies their signatures, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to present a handwriting expert for a thorough analysis.

Date of Decision: May 24, 2023

Bakshish Singh  VS Kanwaljit Singh and another

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Bakshish-Vs-Kawaljeet-26-May-23-PH-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News