pleading, can be looked into (vide Siddik Mahomed Shah v. Mt. Saran and others .
(9) The Rent Control Tribunal conceded in paragraph
plea which was not put forward (Siddik Mahomed Shah v. Mt. Saran, Air 1930 Pc 57). The scope of the said rule was explained
evidence : Bhagwati Prasad v. Chandramaul , . In Siddik Mohammed Shah v. Mt.Saran and others , it was observed that on amount of evidence can be looked
Settlement;
(k). reliance is placed on (i) Siddik Mahomed Shah Vs. Mt. Saran
AIR 1930 Privy Council 57 (1); ( ii) Moran Mar Basselios
Catholicos
decided according to pleading and proof. In Siddik Mahomed Shah v. Mt. Saran and others, AIR 1930 PC 57, the Privy Council approved the rule
Sahni relied upon (1950 Privy Council 90) Siddik Mahomed Shah v. Mt. Saran & Others & (1950 Privy Council 90) The Bank of India
plea which was never put forward vide Viscount. Dunedin v. Mt. Saran and others Air 1930 Privy Council 57. Mr. Mehra next contended that
sought a set off. Siddik Mahomed Shah v. Mt. Saran (AIR 1930 PC 57) is an
authority for the proposition that "no amount
which was never put
forwarded."
[See Siddik Mahomed Shah v. Mt. Saran and
others
reported as Air 1930 Privy Council 57, Siddik Mahomed Shaha Vs. Mt. Saran and others (5). It was observed' that no amount of evidence