Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manjit Kaur @ Taro vs Jagtar Singh on 3 May, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
RSA No.1665 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision:-03.05.2012
Manjit Kaur @ Taro. ……Appellant.
Versus
Jagtar Singh. ……Respondent.
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH.
Present:- Mr. Jasbir Singh, Advocate for the appellant.
***
JASWANT SINGH, J.
Plaintiff had further examined Anil Kumar Gupta (Handwriting and Finger Print Expert) who had proved on record his report Ex.PW-3/1 whereby it was mentioned that the thumb impression on the agreement to sell were of the defendant. In this scenario, I have no hesitation in holding that the agreement to sell is proved on record by the plaintiff and thus the onus had shifted upon defendant/appellant to prove the fact that the agreement to sell was not RSA No.1665 of 2012(O&M) #4# executed by him. This fact is further proved from the circumstance that in rebuttal to the report of the handwriting expert examined by the plaintiff, no handwriting expert has been examined by the defendant so as to prove the fact that the thumb impression did not belong to him. Hence, it can be safely presumed that the agreement to sell was executed by the defendant after fully knowing the contents of the same.