RSA No. 1494 of 2010(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 1494 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: April 07, 2010 Rajwant Kaur and others ...... Appellants Versus Bhagat Singh and others ...... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Y.M.Bhagirath, Advocate for the appellants. **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers 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. This appeal has been filed against concurrent judgments of the Courts below decreeing the suit of the respondents for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The case of the appellants was that their thumb impressions were obtained by fraud. Both the Courts have found that the appellants had not been able to establish their plea of fraud and consequently decreed the suit. The following questions have been proposed:- i) Whether both the courts below have decided the case against the legal provisions and in total ignorance of the evidence RSA No. 1494 of 2010(O&M) 2 available on the record? ii)Whether the plaintiff/respondent was entitled to the relief as claimed? It would be seen that both the questions are pure questions of fact. Learned counsel has argued that agreement to sell was written on a paper which was purchased two months previously. Apart from this no evidence has been led in respect of the plea of fraud. In the circumstances learned counsel has not been able to persuade me that the finding of fact recorded by the courts below in that behalf are either based on no evidence or on such perverse misreading of the evidence so as to be liable for interference under Section 100 CPC. Consequently both the questions proposed against the appellants, this appeal as well as the application for stay are dismissed. No costs. Since the main case has been decided, the pending Civil Misc. Applications, if any, stand disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE April 07 , 2010 sunita