https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277807 Where a transaction affecting immovable property must be evidenced by a registered instrument, its written form cannot be displaced by oral evidence. Sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act do not permit a third party to recast an apparently absolute sale as a mortgage when the alleged mortgage itself required compliance with Section 59 of the Transfer of Property Act. The court distinguished cases where no such statutory formality applied and held that the stranger could not prove that the sale deed was really a mortgage. The attached property was therefore not shown to remain liable as the judgment-debtor's property, and the plaintiff's challenge failed. en-us Mon, 28 Mar 1927 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Dec 2018 10:17:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277807 Where a transaction affecting immovable property must be evidenced by a registered instrument, its written form cannot be displaced by oral evidence. Sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act do not permit a third party to recast an apparently absolute sale as a mortgage when the alleged mortgage itself required compliance with Section 59 of the Transfer of Property Act. The court distinguished cases where no such statutory formality applied and held that the stranger could not prove that the sale deed was really a mortgage. The attached property was therefore not shown to remain liable as the judgment-debtor's property, and the plaintiff's challenge failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 28 Mar 1927 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277807