Annaya Kocha Shetty (D) vs Laxmibai Narayan Satose 2025 INSC 466 - Contract - Ss.91,92 Evidence Act - Pleadings and Judgment
Contracts - The guide to the construction of deeds and tools adopted can broadly be summarised as follows: (1) The contract is first constructed in its plain, ordinary and literal meaning. This is also known as the literal rule of construction - (2) If there is an absurdity created by literally reading the contract, a shift from literal rule may be allowed. This construction is generally called the golden rule of construction (3) Lastly, the contract may be purposively constructed in light of its object and context to determine the purpose of the contract. This approach must be used cautiously. (Para 17)
Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 91,92 - The construction of a deed is “generally speaking, a matter of law.” However, when there is an ambiguity in the deed, determining its meaning is a mixed question of fact and law - This concept is encapsulated by sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act, 1872 - The evidence to vary the terms of an agreement in writing is not admissible, but evidence to show that there is no agreement in the first place is admissible- Thus, unless the grounds fall within the provisos read with the illustrations to section 92, there is a bar on adducing oral evidence. (Para 18.2)
Judgment - A judgment should be coherent, systematic, and logically organised. It should enable the reader to trace the facts to a logical conclusion on the basis of legal principles. (Para 3)
Pleading - The effort of pleading and evidence should be to be concise to the cause and must not confuse the cause. The lengthy pleadings and avoidable evidence are well within the scrutiny of trial courts, and, at the right stage, must be regulated within four corners of the law. Such an approach by trial courts would like a stitch in time, save nine. Long and drawn-out pleadings will run the risk of having a cascading effect on the appellate and revisional courts. Meandering pleadings will land up with laden weight in SLPs, making the narrative difficult. The time has come for courts to invoke the jurisdiction under Order 6 Rule 16 and make litigation workable. Courts are also confronted with AI-generated or computer-generated statements. While technology is useful in enhancing efficiency and efficacy, the placid pleadings will disorient the cause in a case. It is time that the approach to pleadings is re-invented and re-introduced to be brief and precise. (Para 3)
