( 1 ) THE point for consideration in the case is whether when a person admits his signature or thumb impression on a document which purports to have been executed by him, the burden of proving that the document was not executed by him and that he affixed his signature under circumstances referred to by him, falls on hint or whether the plaintiff is bound to prove the execution oi the document.

( 2 ) THERE is some difference of opinion in: different decisions of different High Courts and as the point is coming up in revision frequently the matter needs some careful consideration. The view that the plaintiff has to prove the genuineness of the suit document purporting to have been executed by the defendant event when the defendant admits his signature or thumb-impression on the paper on which the document purports to have been written, is supported by the reasoning that mere affixing of thumb impression or signature-does not amount to execution of a document. It is something more than that. It must be proved or admitted that a document was written and that the person who purports to have executed the document voluntarily affixed his signature or thumb impression knowing full well wh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document