Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.69 seconds)Section 35 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
Sheth Maneklal Mansukhbhai vs Messrs. Hormusji Jamshedji ... on 21 March, 1950
Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act does not refer that the agreement in writing should be in any particular form. But what is required is that there must be proof of there having been an agreement in writing and evidence of its contents should be available from which the term& necessary to constitute the transfer can be ascertained with reasonable certainty. Such evidence is available in this case not only by reason of the admission of P.W. 2. but also by the notice sent on behalf of the plaintiff, Exhibit A-5, to both Ihe second defendant and Vaidyanatha, calling upon them to execute a lease deed for a further period of four years since a year had elapsed by, the date of Exhibit A-5 dated 22nd June, 1950. That such proof of a formal agreement is unnecessary is not only evident from the language of Section 53-A but it also received support from the judgment of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Sheth Maneklal Mansukhbhai v. Hormusji Jamshedji Ginwalla & Sons (1950) 2 M.L.J. 344 : (1950) S.C.J. 317 (S.C.). In that case the evidence of the agreement was afforded by secondary evidence obtained from certain correspondence and after examining the evidence Mahajan, J., who delivered the judgment of the Bench, observed:
1