EXCLUSION OF ORAL BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

EXCLUSION OF ORAL BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IS DISCUSSED HERE AS GIVEN UNDER SECTION 91 AND 92 OF INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872.

1. EXCLUSION OF ORAL BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE -Meghna Bajpai

2. EXCLUSION OF ORAL BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ORAL EVIDENCE Oral evidence means and includes all statements which are made by a witness in the court. Oral evidence is provided under Section 59 and 60 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Documentary evidence means producing a document before the court of law and inspection is done by the court in order to know the facts. Documentary evidence is provided under Section 61 to 66 of the Indian Evidence Act.

3. Section 91 Is a specific provision which lays down the conditions wherein oral evidence is excluded by documentary evidence. Reduced to writing voluntarily Or Required by law to be in writing No evidence except the document itself Or Secondary evidence if allowed

4. Section 91 Exceptions- Exception 1: Appointment of a public officer by the way of writing Exception 2: When probate has been obtained on the basis of a will Explanations- the contracts are comprised of a single document or in several documents. more than one original document Facts other than terms may be proved. Principle- Once something is reduced to writing it is expected that any variations or alterations will be also reduced to writing. Hence, rule of exclusivity applies.

5. Section 92 Lays down the principle of conclusivity of documents. Comes into operation when the documents have been submitted under section 91 for the purpose of contradicting, varying, addition or any modification from its terms. Clarifies itself that only such oral arguments are excluded which contradicts the terms of contract, deposition or any other matter required to be in writing. If such a document is not a contract, grant or deposition of property, then the oral evidence can be included to vary its content. Is applicable only to the parties to the instrument and not to the person who is a stranger to the instrument.

6. Proviso to Section 92

7. Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of the document Under section 99 of the Indian Evidence Act, those persons also can give evidence who are not parties to a document or representative-in-interest regarding any fact which shows a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document.

8. CASE LAWS Bai Hira Devi v. Official Assignee of Bombay (1958 SC) Court held that if the suit is between one of the parties to the document and a third party, then the restriction in Section 91 & 92 will not apply and both of them may give oral evidence of any alteration. Ram Janaki Raman v. State It was held by the court that the bar laid down by section 92 of the Act was not applicable under the Criminal proceeding. Bal Ram v. Ramesh Chandra The requirements of proviso 2 to Section 92 are: On the matter on which the document is silent, a separate oral agreement should be related to it. Such oral agreement should not be inconsistent with the terms of the document

9. Latent and Patent Ambiguity The rule about admission or exclusion of extrinsic evidence has been laid down under section 93 to 98 of the Indian Evidence Act. Such exclusion or admission of extrinsic evidence is in connection with the facts contained in a document which either a contract or not. The ambiguity in the language of a document can be divided into two categories: Patent ambiguity Latent ambiguity A patent ambiguity is when the language of the document or deed is uncertain. The latent ambiguity is an ambiguity which is not present in the deed but it arises due to extrinsic factors.

10. THANK YOU