Specific perfirmance suit

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 03 June 2023 This query is : Resolved
One of the attestor in sale agreement admiting his signature but not contents of the agreement how can we solve this problem

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Satya nand aggarwal (Expert) 04 June 2023
We got definite reply. Please narrate your problem/inquiry

kavksatyanarayana (Expert) 04 June 2023
Once he signed in the document means he well known the facts of the document/agreement.

Advocate Bhartesh goyal (Expert) 04 June 2023
In my opinion witnesses have to prove only execution of document and not to prove contents of document.

Satya nand aggarwal (Expert) 05 June 2023
Plaintiff is bound to prove the contents of the agreement to sell, not only the execution by examining the witness. Thus what supreme court says

Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 05 June 2023
please state facts.

Satya nand aggarwal (Expert) 15 June 2023
Contents of documents – Should be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence- admission of documents –amounts to admission of contents but not its truth – Documents having been produced and marked as required under the evidence act cannot be relied upon by the court – Contents of the document cannot be proved by merely filling in the court. 2010 -1- ACJ -611.

Previous

Next

You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .

Click here to login now

Ask Query
Unanswered Queries

Specific perfirmance suit

Download LCI APP

Our Network Sites