JUDGMENT :

In a suit for specific performance of contract for sale, a two line judgment was delivered by the learned Sub Judge after specifying ten agreements with its respective dates. No discussion was made with respect to the content of the abovesaid documents or its evidentiary value and the purpose for which the said agreements were executed. In fact, there is no speaking order. The relevant portion of the judgment is extracted below for reference:

“The 2nd plaintiff when examined himself as PW1 filed affidavit in lieu of examination in chief reiterating the averments contained in the plaint. He tendered agreement dated 11.04.2009, agreement dated 26.05.2009, agreement dated 27.08.2010, agreement dated 30.01.2011. Agreement dated 01.07.2011, agreement dated 29.5.2012, agreement dated 10.07.2012 agreement dated 10.09.2012, agreement dated 31.03.2013, extract of statement of account, agreement dated 30.06.2013, copy of notice, postal receipt and postal acknowledgment card to be marked and the same were marked as Exts.A1 to A14 respectively. The plaintiffs have proved their case by the unchallenged evidence. Considering the facts and the evidence this court does not find any reason