Hon’ble Umeshwar Pandey, J.—Heard Sri Ashish Mishra, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri R.K. Jain, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. Plaintiffs suit for cancellation of sale deed was dismissed by the trial Court. On appeal before the lower appellate Court the decree of the trial Court has been reversed and the suit has been decreed.

3. Against the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2006, this second appeal has been preferred. The suit is for cancellation of the sale deed on the ground that the same was not executed by the plaintiff. Since the original sale deed could not be filed by the parties, the relevant register No. 8 from Sub-Registrar’s office was summoned by the trial Court from which the photograph of the disputed thumb impressions were taken for expert’s opinion. Its comparison was done from the admitted thumb impression of the plaintiff and the expert’s opinion on both sides stated that the thumb impression on the register No. 8 were slightly tampered with but they did give their reports in favour of the party from which side they were produced in the Court. The trial Court also examined the disputed thumb impressions as well as its alleged tam