Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.46 seconds)Section 92 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 145 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Bai Hira Devi And Others vs The Official Assignee Of Bombay on 20 February, 1958
The two sections are, however, differ in some material
particulars. Section 91 applies to all documents, whether
they purport to dispose of rights or not, whereas Section 92
applies to documents which can be described as dispositive.
Section 91 applies to documents which are both bilateral and
unilateral, unlike Section 92 the application of which is
confined to only to bilateral documents. (See: Bai Hira Devi
and Ors. vs. Official Assignee of Bombay AIR 1958 SC 448).
Both these provisions are based on "best evidence rule".
In Bacon's Maxim Regulation 23, Lord Bacon said "The law
will not couple and mingle matters of speciality, which is
of the higher account, with matter of averment which is of
inferior account in law". It would be inconvenient that
matters in writing made by advice and on consideration, and
which finally import the certain truth of the agreement of
parties should be controlled by averment of the parties to
be proved by the uncertain testimony of slippery memory.
Gangabai W/O Rambilas Gilda vs Chhabubai W/O Pukharajji Gandhi on 6 November, 1981
This Court in Smt. Gangabai v. Smt. Chhabubai (AIR 1982
SC 20) and Ishwar Dass Jain (dead) thr.Lrs. v. Sohan Lal
(dead) by Lrs.(AIR 2000 SC 426) with reference to Section
92(1) held that it is permissible to a party to a deed to
contend that the deed was not intended to be acted upon, but
was only a sham document. The bar arises only when the
document is relied upon and its terms are sought to be
varied and contradicted. Oral evidence is admissible to show
that document executed was never intended to operate as an
agreement but that some other agreement altogether, not
recorded in the document, was entered into between the
parties.
Delta International Ltd vs Shyam Sunder Ganeriwalla And Anr on 9 April, 1999
In Delta International Ltd. v. Shyam Sundar Ganeriwalla
and Anr. (AIR 1999 SC 2607) several principles were culled
out by this Court in relation to disputes on the issue
whether the agreement was for one of lease or licence in a
particular case. Six conclusions were recorded in paragraph