CSA 545/05 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO.545/05 Narayan Sahai & Ors. Versus Har Sahai & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 30/01/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Sanjay Tyagi, for appellants [defendants] Mr. A.K. Bajpai, for respondents [plaintiffs] *** Instant second appeal has been filed by defendant-appellants assailing judgment & decrees of courts below where concurrent finding of fact has been recorded against them. Non-petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance seeking execution of agreement Ex.1 which was duly signed by the parties and consideration of Rs.3,000/- was pass on to the appellant-defendants but the execution of agreement and particularly, the signature over the agreement Ex.1 was seriously disputed by appellant-defendants. Learned trial Judge framed 7 issues and issue nos.1 & 6A which were relevant for examining the controversy after taking into consideration evidence of either side which came on record, finally observed that parties have entered into agreement, consideration was also pass on to the appellant-defendants and their land in dispute was already in possession of non- petitioner-plaintiff. Court of appeal also affirmed the finding recorded by learned trial CSA 545/05 [2] Judge and dismissed the appeal preferred by appellant-defendants. Counsel for appellant Mr. Tyagi has raised the same issue which was considered by court of appeal and his main thrust of submission before this court is that the renunciation deed of agreement Ex.1 in the absence of it being registered cannot be taken note of for its execution. He further submits that once signature was disputed over the agreement Ex.1 by the appellant, only recourse available before learned trial Judge was to send the document for its verification to Forensic Science Laboratory. In absence whereof, no adverse inference could have been drawn against him. Both the issues were specifically dealt with by the court below and finding has been recorded that document Ex.1 was an agreement and consideration was pass on to him. In this situation, it cannot be considered to be a renunciation deed which requires to be registered and so far as the signature is concerned, once from bare perusal of the document which came on record it is prima facie established that consideration was pass on to him. The court below recorded finding about the document being signed by appellant-defendants themselves and concurrent finding of fact has been recorded by the courts below. This court does not find any substantial question of law which emerge for consideration in the instant appeal. CSA 545/05 [3] Consequently, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Record be sent back to trial court. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA545CSA2005 30-1.doc