(1.) The appellant, in both the appeals, is a defendant in a suit for grant of decree of declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is the owner in possession of the property and the alleged power of attorney executed on 21/8/1990, (registered on 22/8/1990), by Mohinder Singh in favour of Sukhdev Singh, is a result of forgery. Consequently the sale deed dtd. 13/5/1995, executed by Sukhdev Singh, in favour of his wife, is not binding on the rights of the plaintiff. Late Sh. Mohinder Singh is the original plaintiff, whereas, Sukhdev Singh and Darshan Kaur are the defendants. The defendants filed a counter claim for grant of decree of possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell dtd. 11/3/1989.
(2.) In the considered opinion of the Court, the following question arises for adjudication:- "Whether a report containing the opinion of a handwriting and fingerprint expert, prepared during the pendency of a criminal case, can be relied upon in a civil suit without ensuring examination and cross-examination of the author?"
(3.) Some admitted facts are as under:- 1. Mohinder Singh son of Swaran Singh was owner in possession of the land located in village Gill on 11/3/1989, he on receipt of Rs.50,000.00 out of a total agreed sale consideration of Rs.6,30,000.00, on 11/3/1989, executed an agreement to sell in favour of Sukhdev Singh with respect to land measuring 6300 square yards, at the rate of Rs.100.00 per square yard. The vendor agreed to execute the sale deed of the land in parts. 2. It was agreed that Rs.1,50,000.00 shall be payable on 20/4/1989. Thereafter, Sukhdev Singh shall pay Rs.1,50,000.00 after a period of every four months from 20/4/1989, in order to pay the entire balance amount. The sale deed was to be executed and registered within a period of 20 months from the date of agreement to sell. After harvesting the crops, the possession of the land shall be handed over to the vendee on 20/4/1989. 3. In other words, the sale deed was to be executed on or before 10/11/1999.