https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304107 The court allowed the plaintiff's amendment of the plaint under Order 6, Rule 17, emphasizing the framing of alternative cases. The promissory note was deemed inadmissible due to insufficient stamping. Conflicting opinions on excluding oral agreements of loan under Section 91 of the Evidence Act were discussed. The promissory note's legal implications as conditional payment or collateral security were analyzed. The court highlighted the need for a nuanced examination of promissory note admissibility. The amendment based on the original cause of action was permitted, subject to evidence presentation. The judgment set aside the Subordinate Judge's order and allowed the amendment with a cost condition. en-us Wed, 21 Apr 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 12:04:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304107 The court allowed the plaintiff's amendment of the plaint under Order 6, Rule 17, emphasizing the framing of alternative cases. The promissory note was deemed inadmissible due to insufficient stamping. Conflicting opinions on excluding oral agreements of loan under Section 91 of the Evidence Act were discussed. The promissory note's legal implications as conditional payment or collateral security were analyzed. The court highlighted the need for a nuanced examination of promissory note admissibility. The amendment based on the original cause of action was permitted, subject to evidence presentation. The judgment set aside the Subordinate Judge's order and allowed the amendment with a cost condition. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Apr 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304107