https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192497 An incidental finding on title recorded by a Court of Small Causes in rent proceedings does not operate as res judicata in a later civil suit where title to immovable property is directly and substantially in issue, because the earlier finding was not a final decision on that issue. Section 92 of the Evidence Act also does not bar oral evidence where the case is that a sale deed was never intended to be acted upon and was executed as a sham; such evidence is admissible to show that the apparent document did not reflect the real transaction. The title claim was therefore upheld and both objections failed. en-us Fri, 06 Nov 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jun 2017 11:07:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192497 An incidental finding on title recorded by a Court of Small Causes in rent proceedings does not operate as res judicata in a later civil suit where title to immovable property is directly and substantially in issue, because the earlier finding was not a final decision on that issue. Section 92 of the Evidence Act also does not bar oral evidence where the case is that a sale deed was never intended to be acted upon and was executed as a sham; such evidence is admissible to show that the apparent document did not reflect the real transaction. The title claim was therefore upheld and both objections failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 Nov 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192497