This is a second appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiffs 2 and 3 assailing the judgments respectively dated 08.09.2008 and 28.08.2003 of the learned VIII Additional District Judge, Guntur and of the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, dismissing respectively the A.S.195 of 2003 and O.S.76 of 1992 filed by the sole plaintiff (since died) for Specific Performance of an agreement to sell dated 30.04.1987 and for perpetual injunction to restrain the defendant (since died) and his men from ever interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the dry land more fully described in the schedule annexed to the plaint.

02. (a) At the outset, it is to be noted that at the time of admission of the second appeal, this Court framed the following substantial questions of law. (1) Whether the Courts below acted in accordance with law in requiring further proof even after admission of the documents and their contents? And (2) whether admitted facts stated in documents require any proof and, if so, what kind of proof?

02. (b) At the time of hearing, this Court had also framed the following additional substantial questions of law viz., (i) Despite the fact that Science of ide