AIR 2009 SUPREME COURT 1527 ::2009 AIR SCW 1030 ::2009 (3) AIR Jhar R 700 ::(2009) 1 CLR 769 (SC) ::(2009) 1 CivilCourtC 412 ::2009 (2) SCC 582 ::(2009) 1 RecCivR 450 ::(2008) 16 Scale 281 ::(2009) 3 AllMR 447 (SC) ::2009 (3) All MR 447 ::(2009) 2 Cal HN 59 ::(2009) 1 ICC 799 ::2009 (2) MadLW 113 ::(2009) 2 Mad LJ 733 ::2009 (3) MPLJ 128 ::(2009) 4 Mah LJ 1 ::(2009) 3 KCCR 160 ::(2009) 2 All WC 1370

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Patna) C

Hon'ble Judge(s): R. V. Raveendran, P. Sathasivam , JJ

(A) Constitution of India , Art.133— Finding of fact - Suit for specific performance of agreement for sale - Plea by defendant that agreement was forged - Plaintiff, apart from producing expert evidence, also producing evidence of witness who asserted on oath that defendant had put her signature in agreement for sale - Defendant also examining one expert - Trial Court preferring to accept opinion of expert examined by side of plaintiff and holding that signatures on agreement were that of defendant - Finding confirmed by Division Bench of High Court in Letters Patent Appeal - Finding thus, based on acceptable materials - Cannot be disturbed. (Para 4) (B) Contract Act (9 of 1872) , S.10— Specific Relief Act (47 of 1963) , S.20, S.15— Validity of agreement - All agreements of sale are bilateral contracts - However, such agreements need not be signed by both parties - Agreement of sale signed only by vendor - Is valid and enforceable by purchaser - Draftsman who prepared agreement using format intended for execution by both vendor and purchaser - However, manner in which parties proceeded clearly demonstrating that it was intended to be executed by vendor alone - Agreement thus signed by vendor was enforceable. AIR 1998 Mad 169 and AIR 1998 Gau 92, Overruled. ....