Expert Test to Unravel Disputed Sale Agreement: Court Sides with Defendant.


17 December 2024 Criminal Trial >> Criminal Law   |   Evidence >> Criminal Law   |   Sale Deeds >> Property & Real Estate  

The case of Savitri Shekuram Jadhav v/s Subhash Namdev Shinde, Sangli & Others revolves around a petition filed by defendant No. 5, Savitri, challenging an order passed by the trial court that rejected her application to have her thumb impression on an agreement for sale (registered on 19th April 2001) examined by an expert. The dispute involves two civil suits: one filed by Savitri seeking a declaration that the agreement is not binding, and another filed by Subhash seeking specific performance of the same agreement. Savitri denies executing the agreement.

The trial court had rejected the application based on several reasons, including the fact that Savitri had known about the agreement for a long time, did not object during the earlier stages of the case, and that other methods could prove her claims. The court also stated that the burden to prove non-execution rested on the plaintiff (Savitri).


 

 

However, the higher court found the trial court's reasoning erroneous. The court noted that Savitri had consistently denied executing the agreement in her pleadings and was entitled to challenge the document’s authenticity, particularly given that the agreement was disputed. The court highlighted that, under the Evidence Act, a party disputing a document's execution can present additional evidence, such as expert examination, to invalidate it.

As a result, the higher court set aside the trial court's order and allowed Savitri's application for expert examination of the agreement. The court directed that the expert be chosen with the parties' consent, and that Savitri could provide thumb impression samples for comparison. The trial court was to issue necessary directions for the procedure.

Indian Evidence Act, 1872  

Registration Act, 1908