Trace Your Case

CHENNADI JALAPATHI REDDY V. BADDAM PRATAPA REDDY

Chennadi Jalapathi Reddy v. Baddam Pratapa Reddy AIR OnLine 2019 SC 970

ISSUE:

  • Whether expert opinion takes precedence over substantive evidence?

RULE:

  • Expert opinion should be considered but not relied upon exclusively. Testimony that is consistent, cogent, and reliable should not be disregarded, even if it contradicts expert opinion.

FACTS:

  • The plaintiff, Chennadi Jalapathi Reddy, filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement.
  • The defendants denied the validity of the sale agreement, alleging forgery of the first defendant’s signature.
  • The Trial Court decreed the suit, finding the evidence of attesting witnesses credible and preferring their testimony over expert opinion, which questioned the genuineness of the signature.
  • The High Court overturned this decision, relying solely on the expert opinion, concluding the signature was forged.

HELD:

  • The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by relying exclusively on expert opinion.
  • The court emphasized that expert evidence should be treated with caution and should not override substantive evidence when the latter is reliable.
  • The court reinstated the Trial Court’s decree, holding that the agreement’s signature was genuine based on the cogent testimony of the attesting witnesses.
  • The Supreme Court restored the Trial Court’s judgment, emphasizing the importance of evaluating all evidence in totality.