[1] In my opinion this appeal must be dismissed on the ground that this is an attempt by the defendants to vary a written and registered agreement, to which Section 92 of the Evidence Act applies, by a subsequent oral agreement. The agreement is none the less oral because it is to be inferred from the conduct of the parties. The judgment of Mr. Justice Richardson is correct and this appeal must be dismissed with costs.
[2] The other appeals will be governed by this decision.
Are you looking for a
legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a
legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and
Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.
Lakhatullah Sheikh v. Bishambar Roy
Lakhatullah Sheikh v. Bishambar Roy
(High Court Of Judicature At Calcutta)
No. | 19-05-1910
Advocate List
- For The Appearing Parties ---.
Bench
- HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. LAWRENCE JENKINS
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DOSS
Eq Citations
- 6 IND. CAS. 577
- LQ/CalHC/1910/262
Head Note
Evidence Act, 1872 — S. 92 — Variation of written and registered agreement by subsequent oral agreement — Oral agreement inferred from conduct of parties — Held, is none the less oral — Registration Act, 1908 — S. 17
