Documents are considered as the most authentic evidence of agreements, contracts, and property dispositions. Sections 94 and 95 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,2023(BSA),gives priority to documentary evidence over oral evidence.These sections aim to stop disputes and conflicts by making it sure that written documents are the primary source of proof in legal matters.
What is the Exclusion of Oral Evidence by Documentary Evidence?
The exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence means when the terms of a contract, grant, or any property-related transaction are documented, the document itself should be given as evidence and no other evidence is acceptable. Oral statements cannot be given to change,rebut, or add to the terms of the written document, except in certain circumstances allowed by law.
Key Components
Primacy of Documentary or written Evidence (Section 94 of BSA):It sheds light on the crucial role of written documentation in legal matters, particularly concerning contracts, property grants, and the legal necessity for written documents. It firmly establishes that when these matters are documented in writing, the written document itself becomes the primary and most reliable form of evidence.Section 94 of BSA highlights that the document itself must be given to prove its contents,reinforcing the fundamental principle of best evidence.
Exceptions in Section 94:
- If a person has acted as a public officer, the document used in his appointment does not need to be proved.
- In India wills admitted to probate can be proved by the probate itself.
Applicability of Section 94
For Section 94 of BSA to come into play, the document in question must either be a contract, grant, or a disposition of property,even if it’s not legally mandated to be in writing. Section 94 of BSA extends its reach to both voluntary and compulsory documentary transactions. Whether these agreements are encapsulated within a single document or scattered across multiple papers (as elucidated in Explanation 1 to Section 94), all relevant documents must be presented as evidence to validate the contract’s legitimacy.
Moreover, when multiple original copies exist, Section 94 of BSA deems it adequate to prove just one of them, as stipulated in Explanation 2 to Section 94. Illustration-if a bill of exchange is in a set of three, it suffices to establish the reliability of a single copy as evidence.
Exclusion of Oral Evidence
Under Section 94 of BSA there is a cardinal principle that oral evidence is not acceptable for proving the important “terms” of a contract, grant, or a similar transaction. These important terms enclose crucial elements such as consideration or conditions precedent and cannot be substantiated verbally. However, it’s worth saying that oral evidence can still be given to establish facts beyond the scope of these important terms, as clarified in Explanation 3 to Section 94.
Exclusion of Oral Agreements (Section 95 of BSA): Section 95 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,2023(BSA) complements Section 94 by specifying that any alterations, modifications, or additions to documents governed by Section 94 must also be substantiated with documentary evidence. This strengthens the idea that written records hold prime importance in legal proceedings.
Provisos under Section 95
Exceptions to the general rule of barring oral evidence from contradicting or altering the terms of a document are delineated in the six provisions within the Section 95 provisos. These exceptions encompass various scenarios, including:
- Proviso 1 : Oral evidence is allowed if it invalidates the document.
- Proviso 2: Separate oral agreements consideration in conjunction with the written document.
- Proviso 3: Allowing oral agreements as conditions precedent to the written document.
- Proviso 4 : Oral subsequent agreements admissibility for actions like rescission or renewal of a contract.
- Proviso 5: Use of oral evidence permissible to prove usage or custom annexed to the contract.
- Proviso 6: Incorporating extrinsic evidence of surrounding circumstances.
Exceptions
General rule is that documentary evidence takes primacy, there are exceptions as well-
- Fraud,unlawfulness,or Mistake: Oral evidence is admissible for proving issues like fraud, illegality, or mistakes that could contradict the document.
- Silent Matters: Oral agreements on matters not covered by the document, and those oral agreements that do not counter its terms, may be proved.
- Conditions Precedent: Oral agreements that must be satisfied before the contract becomes enforceable are considered admissible.
- Modifications or Rescissions: Oral agreements modifying or negating a contract after it has been made can be admitted unless the law needs the contract to be in written or registered form.
Examples
- If an insurance policy covers goods shipped from Goa to Visakhapatnam, an oral agreement to prohibit a particular ship from the insurance policy cannot be proved in court.
- A written contract needs payment on April 1, 2024, cannot be countered by an oral agreement holding payment until April 31, 2024.
- If a deed of property had a map, oral evidence cannot be given to claim that land not visible on the map to be included in the sale.
- If someone is convinced to sign a contract on false representations, this can be proved with oral evidence, even if the contract is in written form.
Why is This Important?
The exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence is important for preserving the integrity and authenticity of legal documents. By giving supremacy to written evidence, the law lowers the risk of controversies and makes sure that agreements are transparent and enforceable. This helps in creating a steady legal environment where parties can believe that their written agreements will be upheld.
In legal proceedings, when documentary evidence clashes with oral testimony, the written record typically prevails due to its clarity, reliability, and adherence to the principles enshrined in Section 94 and Section 95 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,2023(BSA) .These sections underscore the paramount importance of written documentation while providing well-defined exceptions for the admissibility of oral evidence in specific situations.
Source:
