Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
V. Lakshminarayanan, J
M. Vasanthakumar – Appellant
Versus
Devika – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. o.s.no.42 of 2018 is a suit (Para 2) |
| 2. summons have been served (Para 3) |
| 3. after restoration of the suit (Para 4) |
| 4. learned counsel draws my attention (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 5. a perusal of the order shows (Para 8) |
| 6. therefore, i do not find (Para 9 , 10) |
| 7. with the above observation (Para 11) |
O R D E R
2. O.S.No.42 of 2018 is a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale with respect to undivided 1/3rd share, in favour of the plaintiff, pursuant to an agreement dated 06.04.2016.
4. After restoration of the suit, the petitioner filed an application to send the document for handwriting expert to compare the signatures available in the suit agreement dated 06.04.2016 along with the admitted signatures of the defendants 1 and 2. The application was returned by the learned District Judge pointing out that the suit is in the list and since the document has not been marked, the plaintiff is not entitled for the relief in the said application. Hence this revision.
6. Learned counsel draws my attention to the written statement filed by the defendants to plead that as the defendants have denied the document, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove the signatures on the doc
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
