evidence has been
hoodwinked in marking those documents through P.W.3. Strangely, those
two documents have not been ... evidence of D.W.1 by pointing out that these
documents are unsigned and the Additional Master has been coaxed to put
questions
evidence has been
hoodwinked in marking those documents through P.W.3. Strangely, those
two documents have not been ... evidence of D.W.1 by pointing out that these
documents are unsigned and the Additional Master has been coaxed to put
questions
defendant Mr.P.Sukamar. As could be seen from the documents marked in the suit all the correspondence prior to the auction dated 11.03.2002 were ... said letter. The Said Ex.D8 also contains an unsigned list which reads as Purchaser Names and address, Auction held on 11.03.2002. This list
defendant would rely upon two documents to strengthen his case of oral partition. The 1st of the documents is Ex.P1 which ... parties for the arrangement suggested by him.
16. The said unsigned arrangement records the fact that there was an earlier oral partition even during
Venkatraman Street bears Survey No.7039/2. The said sketch is unsigned and it is not known as to what exactly are the boundaries ... been produced by the defendants as Ex.D8. The said document issued on 13.11.1996 would show that the TS. number of the property with
true and valid document, the learned counsel would take me through the document itself and contend that the manner in which the signatures are affixed ... creates a suspicion as to whether Ex.A-16 is a genuine document. While it is true that in the last page
Narendra Prasad vs Ramnath Goenka (Deceased) on 9 March, 2018
Author: R.Subramanian
Bench: R
Nithya vs S.Ravichandran on 20 October, 2023
Author: R.Subramanian
Bench: R.Subramanian
C
