G.Kumutha is only residing at Nagarasampattai, not at Pochampalli as put froth by the plaintiff. The attestor examined as PW2 would state that he had witnessed the scribe of the sale agreement by Kumutha at Pochampalli and the plaintiff received Rs.50,000/- from the defendant and both the plaintiff and the defendant signed in the sale agreement and that he and the other witness Narayanan had attested the sale agreement and thereafter, the scribe had also signed in the sale agreement. Therefore, from the evidence of PW2, the attestor, the scribe has also signed in the sale agreement Ex.A1, however, on a perusal of Ex.A1, other than mentioning that the same had been written by G.Kumutha, Nagarasampatti, the alleged scribe has not signed in the sale agreement. When the parties had endeavoured to proceed to the Sub Registrar Office, Pochampalli, for enabling the scribe Kumutha to write the sale agreement and when according to the plaintiff, Kumutha is stationed at Pochampalli, however, as above pointed out, Kumutha is only stationed at Nagarasampatti and if the parties had been very particular that only the scribe Kumutha should write the sale agreement, as rightly contended by the defendant's counsel and held by the trial Court, the parties would have endeavoured to secure the signature of the scribe Kumutha in the sale agreement. However, the sale agreement does not contain the signature of the scribe Kumutha and on the contrary, PW2 the attestor would claim that the scribe Kumutha had signed in the sale agreement, after he and the other attestor had attested the same. The abovesaid factor throws the serious doubt with reference to the execution of the sale agreement Ex.A1 by the scribe Kumutha, at Pochampalli. If really the parties had endeavoured to writ the sale agreement at Pochampalli, that too with the aid of the scribe Kumutha, when according to the plaintiff, the agreement had been written in a shed lying opposite to the Sub Registrar Office, Pochampalli, if really the agreement had come into existence, nothing prevented the parties from registering the sale agreement. However, it is found that the sale agreement Ex.A1 has not been registered.
