https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183389 Section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act bars oral evidence only between parties to a written instrument or their representatives in interest, and only to vary a duly proved document. In proceedings under section 55 of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, the official assignee acts for creditors and is not the insolvent's representative in interest for this purpose. The transferees could therefore resist the assignee's claim by proving the true nature of the transaction, because the section 92 exclusion rests on mutuality and does not apply against a stranger to the document. Oral evidence to show that the deed of gift was supported by valuable consideration was therefore admissible. en-us Thu, 20 Feb 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jun 2016 11:27:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183389 Section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act bars oral evidence only between parties to a written instrument or their representatives in interest, and only to vary a duly proved document. In proceedings under section 55 of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, the official assignee acts for creditors and is not the insolvent's representative in interest for this purpose. The transferees could therefore resist the assignee's claim by proving the true nature of the transaction, because the section 92 exclusion rests on mutuality and does not apply against a stranger to the document. Oral evidence to show that the deed of gift was supported by valuable consideration was therefore admissible. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 20 Feb 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183389