JUDGMENT :

In a suit for specific performance of contract for sale, an application I.A.No.881/1998 was submitted for amending the plaint for incorporating an alternative relief of return of the advance amount. But it was dismissed by the trial court on the sole reason of delay. Subsequently the suit was dismissed on merits, against which the plaintiff came up in appeal.

2. Ext.A1 is the agreement for sale dated 14/7/1994 executed between the plaintiff and one Govindan, the predecessor-in-interest of the defendant. He passed away before the expiry of the period of the agreement. After the issuance of demand notice to some of the legal heirs, a suit was filed for specific performance of the contract. The trial court on consideration of oral evidence of PW2 and the discrepancies therein found that Ext.A1 agreement is not genuine and dismissed the suit. It is under challenge on the reason that the discrepancy in the oral evidence of PW2 regarding the number of thumb impressions affixed in Ext.A1 is quite natural as he was examined after the expiry of more than four years from the date of execution of Ext.A1. Further, the evidence adduced by the two attesting witnesses was rejected withou