Specific Performance - Suit for specific performance of agreement of sale - ·Execution of the deed denied by defendant - Trial Court doubting the authenticity of the  document on the grounds that attesting witnesses were not reliable; the document having been written on two stamp papers of different dates; and onus to prove the execution of the document was not discharged by plaintiff having failed to make reference to fingerprint expert to prove the disputed thumb impression- Order reversed by first appellate court, putting the onus on the defendant - Court comparing the disputed thumb impression and admitted one on its own without the aid of expert opinion and concluding the impression to be that of the executor- High Court reversing the order of first appellate court- On appeal, held: Though the document written on two stamp papers purchased on different dates is admissible, on the facts and circumstances of the case, its genuineness is doubtful- In view of denial of execution by the defendant, onus to prove the same was on the plaintiff - Act of the first appellate court in comparing the disputed thumb impression with the admitted one, while the impression was not clear, without the aid of expert opinion is not proper - Stamp Act, 1899 - s. 54 - Stamp Rules, 1925 - Evidence Act, 1872 - ss. 45 and 73 - Onus to prove.