further contended that plaintiff is in
a habit of forging the documents and this fact was admitted by him
during his cross examination when he admitted ... trial proceedings.
22. It is further contended that the sale documents has been
antedated by the plaintiff to grab the suit property purchased by wife
remember who got this
document signed from him but he had signed this
document against loan taken from the defendant. He
emphasized that same ... title documents of the suit
property were taken by the defendant. The factum of
giving and taking of the property documents is clearly
mentioned
testimonies of all police witnesses. Also, the
seizure memo is doubtful as antedated for bearing the FIR number in it. Lastly,
it is submitted that ... state and the Ld.
Counsel for the accused and carefully perused the documents on record. Before
appreciating the evidence for deciding the present case
date of 6th of May 2017 and they could not have
been antedated. It is also stated that it is only due to the pending ... could not have been reasonably within the power of the
Complainant to antedate the stamp papers, it would have been very
well possible to fill
alleged recovery has been made. Also, the seizure memo is
doubtful as antedated for bearing the FIR number in it. Lastly, it is
submitted that ... state and
the Ld. Counsel for the accused and carefully perused the
documents on record. Before appreciating the evidence for
deciding the present case
transaction attracting
such property and as per the proviso the unregistered document may be
received in evidence only for the purpose of collateral transaction ... means the reply to the legal notice sent by the plaintiff is antedated.
Even there are different dates mentioned under the heads
transaction attracting
such property and as per the proviso the unregistered document may be
received in evidence only for the purpose of collateral transaction ... means the reply to the legal notice sent by the plaintiff is antedated.
CS DJ ADJ845/18
Even there are different dates mentioned under
said document Mark B (Ex.WW1/M1) on the face of it is a
forged and fabricated document.
52. The reason being that ... into consideration there is no
explanation, as to how, the letter, is antedated as of 03.08.2012
ID No. 223516 14/20
(07.08.2012) mentioning
Cbi vs . M/S Adhunik Corporation Ltd. & Ors. ... on 21 April, 2022
IN THE
Sh. Yash Pal vs The on 18 April, 2022
IN THE COURT OF SHRI RAJ
