Published on: May 15, 2024 08:21 IST
Court: Supreme Court of India
Case: Muddasani Venkata Narsaiah v. Muddasani Sarojana 2016
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that it is settled law that denial for want of knowledge is no denial at all. It is held that provisions contained in Order 8 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 require pleadings to be answered specifically in written statement.
It is held that if a defendant has no knowledge of a fact pleaded by the plaintiff is not tantamount to a denial of existence of fact, not even an implied denial. It is further held that the If no questions are put during the cross examination then the Court would presume that the witness account has been accepted.
13. Coming to the question whether execution of sale deed in favour of plaintiff has been proved, the High Court has held that the sale deed has not been proved for want of examination of Buchamma. The High Court has ignored the pleadings of the parties and the evidence on the question of execution of sale deed which establishes that sale deed had been executed by Buchamma in favour of the plaintiff. In the written statement filed on behalf of the defendants, the sale deed was denied for want of knowledge.
A perusal of same indicates that the authority of Buchamma to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff was put into question. Defendant 3 Sarojana in her deposition in court did not deny the fact that sale deed was executed by Buchamma in favour of the plaintiff. She has stated that she was not aware whether Buchamma has executed any sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. She only asserted that she was the adopted daughter of Yashoda.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra