https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279968 A suit seeking declaration and injunction was analysed as outside the Bengal Money Lenders Act, 1940 because it was not an application to reopen a decree or to take accounts, and compliance with court-fee requirements could not convert it into a proceeding under Sections 36 or 38. The transaction was also treated as an outright sale, because the deed contained no stipulation of debt, interest, or re-transfer, the alleged oral reconveyance was unproved, and Section 92 of the Evidence Act barred contradiction of the clear document by oral assertion. The result was that the sale deed operated as an absolute conveyance. en-us Fri, 17 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Apr 2019 10:00:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279968 A suit seeking declaration and injunction was analysed as outside the Bengal Money Lenders Act, 1940 because it was not an application to reopen a decree or to take accounts, and compliance with court-fee requirements could not convert it into a proceeding under Sections 36 or 38. The transaction was also treated as an outright sale, because the deed contained no stipulation of debt, interest, or re-transfer, the alleged oral reconveyance was unproved, and Section 92 of the Evidence Act barred contradiction of the clear document by oral assertion. The result was that the sale deed operated as an absolute conveyance. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 17 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279968