https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276367 Where a contract is embodied in writing, its terms must be proved from the document itself, and oral evidence cannot be used to vary or supply those terms. Because the writings relied on were found to have been materially altered and mutilated, the instrument lost its legal identity and could not support recovery. The claim also failed on limitation: the alleged promise was for performance within a reasonable time, yet the suit was filed six years later, and the supposed acknowledgment was itself altered. The court therefore held the claim unenforceable and time-barred. en-us Mon, 20 Feb 1939 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Nov 2018 12:39:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276367 Where a contract is embodied in writing, its terms must be proved from the document itself, and oral evidence cannot be used to vary or supply those terms. Because the writings relied on were found to have been materially altered and mutilated, the instrument lost its legal identity and could not support recovery. The claim also failed on limitation: the alleged promise was for performance within a reasonable time, yet the suit was filed six years later, and the supposed acknowledgment was itself altered. The court therefore held the claim unenforceable and time-barred. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 20 Feb 1939 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276367