examination in chief that the signatures at “A to B” on
Ex.2 to Ex.7 are not of his. These signatures are forged.
Though at one place, he has stated that on Ex.6 and Ex.7
also “A to B” part contains his signatures but it appears
that due to typographical error, the word “not” has been
left out. If we read the examination in chief in whole, it
reveals that at other places, he has not only refused his
signatures on revival letters but also stated that the
signatures are fabricated and forged. In cross examination,
he has further stated that on the revival / acknowledgment
letters Ex.2 to Ex.7, “A to B” signatures are not of his,
rather they are forged one.
9. Documents themselves cannot be taken to be of
any value unless their execution is proved by the legal,
relevant and material evidence of the person who has seen
the person signing the documents or who may be conversant
with the signatures of the person executing the documents.
In absence of any such evidence, Ex.2 to Ex.7 cannot be
said to have been established as valid acknowledgment by
the defendant. In the instant matter, the Manager of the
Bank, examined to prove the acknowledgments has admitted
that he was not posted in that Bank branch at the time of
their execution. Moreover, he has specifically said that
he cannot identify the signatures of the defendant.
Therefore, acknowledgments cannot be taken to be validly
proved. The learned courts below have not noticed this
aspect of the matter. The case N.T. Vijayakumar & Ors. vs
The Allahabad Bank, reported in 1999(2) Civil Court Cases,
571 (Karnataka) cited by the appellant is squarely
applicable in the instant case. In absence of valid proof of
execution of debt acknowledgments, the benefit of
protection of section 18 or 19 of the Limitation Act is not
available to the plaintiff Bank and as such, the suit filed
in the year 2003 for recovery of loan disbursed in the
year 1985, stands time barred.
Reportable
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B.Civil Second Appeal No. 242 / 2013
Indra Mal v State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur,
MR. JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR VYAS
Dated: 04/01/2017.
Citation: AIR 2017 Raj 66
