TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the terms of a registered agreement for sale could be altered, rescinded or substituted by an oral understanding or by minutes of meetings so as to defeat the allottee's right to refund under the real estate statute.
Analysis: The agreement for sale was reduced into writing and stipulated the date for handing over possession. The alleged extension of time was sought to be inferred from meetings and correspondence, but there was no written subsequent agreement executed between the parties. Under the Evidence Act, once the terms of a written instrument are proved, they cannot be varied by oral evidence, and a registered written document can be altered only in the manner known to law. The alleged oral arrangement did not constitute a valid substitution or novation of the contractual terms. Since possession was not delivered on the agreed date and no legally effective extension was proved, the allottee's statutory right to seek refund under the real estate law remained intact.
Conclusion: The oral claim of extension was rejected and the entitlement to refund was upheld in favour of the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: A registered written agreement for sale cannot be modified, varied or superseded by an alleged oral arrangement or unsigned meeting minutes, and failure to deliver possession in accordance with the written agreement attracts the allottee's statutory right to refund.
TaxTMI 
