R.S.A No. 2669 of 2009 (O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A No. 2669 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : August 13, 2009 Baljinder Singh and others, ...... Appellant (s) v. Adarsh Kumar, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. V.K.Shukla, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. K.R.Dhawan, Advocate for the respondent. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned lower appellate Court reversing that of the trial Court and thereby decreeing the suit of the respondent for specific performance of the agreement to sell executed by the mother of the appellants in favour of the respondent. The following questions have been proposed :- “ (i) Whether the findings of the learned first appellate Court are sheer misreading of oral as well as documentary evidence, which is inadmissible in R.S.A No. 2669 of 2009 (O&M) ::2:: evidence? (ii) Whether the learned first appellate Court could reverse the findings of the learned trial Court without appreciating the evidence of both the parties ? (iii) Whether the findings of the learned first appellate Court are perverse and that of the learned trial Court are based on appreciation of entire evidence ? (iv) Whether the findings of the learned trial Court could be reversed without appreciating the fact that there are clear discrepancies in the pleadings and evidence led by the respondent/plaintiff and without removing the same ? (v) Whether readiness and willingness of the party can be presumed without making his presence along with consideration amount on the stipulated date in the office of concerned Sub Registrar ?” It would be seen that all the questions proposed are questions of fact. Counsel for the appellants has taken me through the findings of the Courts below in a bid to argue that the findings recorded by the trial Court are correct and those recorded by the lower appellate Court are erroneous. Normally, the lower appellate Court is the final Court and, therefore, on this ground alone this appeal is not maintainable, yet on the insistence of counsel for the appellants I have perused the judgments of the Courts below to consider these questions. In my opinion, the most important fact is that the thumb impression of Kartar Kaur, mother of the appellants, has been held to be proved on the agreement to sell. In view of the specific stand of R.S.A No. 2669 of 2009 (O&M) ::3:: the appellants that the agreement was forged this finding would completely displace their case. Counsel for the appellants has not been able to persuade me that the finding regarding thumb impression is either based on no evidence or is based on such misreading of evidence as would render the same perverse. Consequently, this appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. As the main appeal has since been dismissed, all the pending civil miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) August 13, 2009. JUDGE `kk'