Back
HIGH COURT OF RANGOON
Maung Pu & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Maung Po Thant & Ors. – Respondents
Decided On : 10-01-1928
JUDGMENT
1. The respondents sued in the Sub-divisional Court of Kyauktan the appellants on a promissory note, for Rs. 3,466. Appellants inter alia admitted execution of the note, but pleaded that plaintiffs had agreed to accept the sum of Rs. 3,200 in full settlement of this and a number of other claims and that they also agreed to accept payment by instalments. The trial Judge excluded this evidence under the provisions of Section 92, Evidence Act, and in this respect, he was upheld on appeal by the District Court, Hanthawaddy.
2. It is urged before us that both the Courts erred by reason of Section 63, Contract Act, which gives a party full power to modify or remit any part of the terms of contract entered into between the parties. We do not think that the ground of the lower Court's decision can be maintained. While no oral evidence can be given to contradict or modify the original contract, there is nothing to prevent oral evidence being adduced under prov. 4 of Section 92, in order to prove satisfaction of the claim. But the fact of appellants proving the basis of the judgment appealed from to be an error does not avail them because' the agreement pleaded does not suggest any consideration whatever 'for the' alleged promise to take less than
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
