The admissibility of additional evidence in a specific performance case is determined by the denial of execution of the agreement and the relevance of the evidence to the issues at hand.

Raj Mohan Singh, J.

This revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 03.07.2017 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) NRI Court, Jalandhar, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for producing handwriting expert for comparison of signature of respondent No.1 on the agreement to sell with his standard signature on the registered transfer deed dated 20.03.2015 by way of additional evidence was dismissed.

2. Petitioner/Plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance on the basis of agreement to sell dated 06.08.2014 entered between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 in respect of the suit property.

3. The defendants contested the suit by way of filing written statement, wherein they have denied execution of the agreement to sell between the plaintiff and defendant No.1. In preliminary objections No.1 and 2, the defendants pleaded that no agreement have ever been executed between the plaintiff and the defendants. The plaintiff has not come to the Court with clean hands and has attempted to mislead the Court to get ex parte orders. Apart from the alleged agreement placed on record of June 2014, plaintiff and his father had been showing another agreement to sell and had been threatening that they will use that document to file suit in the Court. Plaintiff had been pressurizing to sell out the land of defendant No.1 to the plaintiff which falls adjoining to the house of the plaintiff.

4. In para nos.2 and 3 of the written statement filed by the defendants on merits, the following averments were made:-

"2. That para no.2 of the plaint is wrong and denied, except the fact that previously the land was owned by defendant no.1. It is wrong and denied that defendant no.1 has entered into agreement to sell with plaintiff on 06.08.2014 or at any other point of time. It is also wrong and denied that the land of 1 Kanal measuring 207 Sq. Ft. was agreed to be sold to the plaintiff. It is wrong and denied that sale consideration was fixed at Rs.16 Lacs or any other amount. It is wrong and denied that defendant No.1 ever agreed to sell his land to the plaintiff. It is worth mentioning here that the market value of the land is much higher than has been quoted by the plaintiff in the corresponding paragraph of the plaint. All the annexure documents are wrong and denied. Alleged agreement to sell dated 06.08.2014 is act of fraud. Site plan attached and other wrong documents are wrong and denied.

3. That para no.3 of the plaint is wrong and denied. It is wrong and denied that there was an agreement dated 06.08.2014. It is further wrong and denied that Rs.5 Lac or any part thereof or any other amount was ever paid to the defendant no.1 by the plaintiff as earnest money or for any other purpose. It is wrong and denied that defendant had executed any agreement to sell in presence of any witness. It is wrong and denied that last date of execution of alleged agreement to sell was fixed as 10.06.2015. It is further wrong and denied that possession was given to the plaintiff. It is also wrong and denied that plaintiff is in the possession of the same. It is wrong and denied that tube well is installed in the said area by the plaintiff for supply of the water to the house of his father, it is wroth mentioning here that defendant no.1 had small holding near the house of the plaintiff (disputed property). To irrigate that area defendant no.1 had installed bore well to irrigate that area with use of generator. It is worth mentioning here that photographs filed by the plaintiff are falsely generated one. The true photographs has been placed on record by the defendants at the time of filing of the power of attorney on 19.06.2015. Those may kindly be considered as document placed on record alongwith written statement. It is wrong and denied that plaintiff is in possession of the said land. It is also worth mentioning here that even as per the settle law without registration of document pertaining to agreement to sell,