Oral evidence-mortgage
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 27 January 2012
This query is : Resolved
is there any supreme court decision which allows oral evidence to prove Mortgage redemtpion
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 27 January 2012
tell your case first.
Decision without having regard to your fact situation would be of no help.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 27 January 2012
Go through the following citation wherein this matter has been dicussed:
Hansia v. Bakhtawarmal
AIR 1958 Raj. 102
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 28 January 2012
Dear Mr Makddad. the author is eying high.
He requires only supreme court decision, high court decision is not fit for him.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 28 January 2012
Raj and Burman sir thanks for advice. One of my client discharged the mortgage debt , but did not register the same. Also he lost the original mortgage deed. After 30 years mortgage is claiming that mortgage is not discharged. In Regular appeal it is proved that mortgaged is discharged after considering the oral evidence. Now the case is in high court stage to consider whether oral evidence can be let to prove the mortgage redemption.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 28 January 2012
Punit Mahton And Ors. vs Mahabir Mahton And Ors. on 30 January, 1959
Equivalent citations: AIR 1959 Pat 531
Author: S Prasad
Bench: S Prasad
It was observed by Sadasiva Ayyar, J. in the case of ILR 37 Mad 423: (AIR 1914 Mad 489) as follows:
"The last contention about the admissibility of oral evidence to prove the alleged discharge of the mortgage of 1885 might be disposed of shortly. A mortgage might, even if created by a registered instrument, be proved to have been extinguished by letting in admissible evidence (including oral evidence) or payment of the mortgage amount or by letting in admissible evidence of any other transaction which operates as a mode of payment -- Ramavatar v. Tulsi Prosad Singh, 14 Cal L5 507,
ajay sethi
(Expert) 28 January 2012
it has been held, in cases mentioned above that such a subsequent contract between the parties can be pleaded and proved even though that contract, otherwise valid, is oral. It is not necessary that it should also be in writing and registered to operate effectively for the purposes of the adjustment and fulfilment of the rights and liabilities of the parties under the previous contract which is a registered instrument in writing, I think, therefore, that there is no substance in the argument of Mr. B.C. De that in this particular case the Courts below erred in allowing evidence to be adduced in support of the plea of redemption of the zarpeshgi of 1929 by the oral settlement of the same lands with the defendants adjusting the salami against the dues under the zarpeshgi.
M/s. Y-not legal services
(Expert) 27 January 2012
