https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197724 A lender cannot bypass an inadmissible promissory note by suing on an implied original debt if the note embodies the whole loan contract, because Section 91 of the Evidence Act bars proof of the bargain otherwise than by the written instrument and Section 35 of the Stamp Act excludes an improperly stamped note from evidence. Where, however, the note does not contain the entire bargain, or was taken only as collateral security or conditional payment, the surrounding circumstances may be proved and the underlying debt enforced. Whether the note exhausts the contract depends on the facts, so the matter was remanded for fresh consideration. en-us Thu, 10 Feb 1938 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jan 2018 12:24:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197724 A lender cannot bypass an inadmissible promissory note by suing on an implied original debt if the note embodies the whole loan contract, because Section 91 of the Evidence Act bars proof of the bargain otherwise than by the written instrument and Section 35 of the Stamp Act excludes an improperly stamped note from evidence. Where, however, the note does not contain the entire bargain, or was taken only as collateral security or conditional payment, the surrounding circumstances may be proved and the underlying debt enforced. Whether the note exhausts the contract depends on the facts, so the matter was remanded for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 10 Feb 1938 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197724