High Court for States of Telangana & Andhra Pradesh: In a recent judgment, a Single Judge Bench of T. Rajani, J. upheld the decision of the lower court where on account of the evidence being doubtful, it was discarded and the suit was dismissed.
The plaintiff claimed that the defendants had borrowed a certain amount from them which they were unable to discharge and in lieu of that debt, they executed an agreement of sale in the favour of the plaintiff. It was also contended that when the defendants did not execute the sales deed within the stipulated time and after various demands by the plaintiff, they were issued a notice to which they also did not respond. The defendant denied borrowing any amount from the plaintiff and submitted that she borrowed some amount from another person, and pledged her gold ornaments. It was her belief that she signed blank papers while pledging her gold ornaments. The defendant also contended that the plaintiff’s family had a reputation for violence in realization of debts.
The Court considered whether the relief of specific performance could be granted to the appellant under these circumstances. On examining the evidence produced by both the parties, it was realised that the credibility of the appellant was under a shadow of doubt. The sale agreement was executed even prior to the purchase of stamp papers, the suit was filed on the same date which was the stipulated date for execution of sale deed and even the pronotes which were signed at a difference of one year, were scribed by the same scribe, with the same ink by all the attestors and even so that one of the attestor remains the same.
The Court observed that the record of evidence pertaining to the alleged monetary transactions was fabricated and the evidence was liable to be discarded. The appeal was dismissed. [Sabella Soora Reddy v. Lankalapalli Rajyam, 2017 SCC OnLine Hyd 187, decided on 09-06-2017]
