SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1931 Supreme(Mad) 194

CURGENVEN
Alapati Venkataramayya – Appellant
Versus
Alapati Nagamma – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Curgenven, J.

1. The suit out of which this second appeal arises was to recover possession of a house under a gift-deed executed by the mother (defendant 2) of the plaintiffs late husband, Subbayya, jointly to Subbayya and herself. The claim was resisted upon various grounds, the first with which I propose to deal being the question of attestation of the deed. It purports to have been attested by five persons, two being signatories and three marksmen. If the plaintiff fails to establish two valid attestations amongst these, there are the further contentions that the writer of the document and the Sub-Registrar who registered it may be held to rank as attestors.

2. Of the two signatories one has not been traced and there is no evidence which would allow the Court to conclude that he validly attested the document. The other has been examined as P.W. 7 and although he himself has stated in evidence that he did not see the executant sign, the learned District Judge has accepted the evidence of P. Ws. 9 and 10 who state that he attested the document. This assertion was not made the subject of cross-examination and I think that it must carry with it the implication that it was a va






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top