<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1965 (4) TMI 137 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304107</link>
    <description>Amendment of a plaint may clarify that recovery is founded on the original loan transaction where a promissory note was executed only as security or evidence of debt. A promissory note does not merge or discharge the underlying loan unless the parties intended it as absolute payment. Therefore, even if the note is inadmissible because of insufficient stamping, the original consideration may be proved, subject to evidence. Section 91 of the Evidence Act does not preclude pleading the underlying loan in these circumstances. The amendment merely clarifies the claim&#039;s basis and does not determine whether the note discharged the debt, which remains a matter of evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2022 12:04:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=690127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (4) TMI 137 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304107</link>
      <description>Amendment of a plaint may clarify that recovery is founded on the original loan transaction where a promissory note was executed only as security or evidence of debt. A promissory note does not merge or discharge the underlying loan unless the parties intended it as absolute payment. Therefore, even if the note is inadmissible because of insufficient stamping, the original consideration may be proved, subject to evidence. Section 91 of the Evidence Act does not preclude pleading the underlying loan in these circumstances. The amendment merely clarifies the claim&#039;s basis and does not determine whether the note discharged the debt, which remains a matter of evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304107</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>