LC 0803 Module 06 Law of Evidence - Oral and Documentary Evidence II

    The law of evidence is a fundamental aspect of the legal system, governing the admissibility, weight, and interpretation of evidence presented in courts. In this blog article, we will explore the intricate aspects of oral and documentary evidence in relation to the law of evidence. Understanding these principles is essential for legal professionals, researchers, and individuals seeking knowledge about the legal system.

Table of Content

1. Introduction
2. Presumptions as to Documents and Electronic Records (Sections 79-90A)
3. Exclusion of Oral by Documentary Evidence (Sections 91-100))
4. Conclusion
5. References

1. Introduction:

    The law of evidence is a cornerstone of the legal system, providing guidelines for the presentation and evaluation of evidence in courts. It plays a crucial role in ensuring fair and just outcomes in legal proceedings. Within the scope of evidence, oral and documentary evidence are two primary forms of evidence that hold significant importance.

    Oral evidence refers to statements, testimonies, and declarations made by witnesses or parties involved in a case. It often includes witness testimonies, expert opinions, and confessions made verbally during court proceedings. On the other hand, documentary evidence consists of written or recorded materials, such as contracts, letters, photographs, and audio or video recordings.

    In this blog article, we will delve into the intricacies of oral and documentary evidence in the context of the law of evidence. Understanding the rules, presumptions, and limitations surrounding these types of evidence is crucial for legal practitioners, researchers, and individuals interested in gaining insights into the legal system.

    By examining the provisions related to oral and documentary evidence, we will explore their admissibility, weight, and the circumstances in which they can be used to support or challenge legal arguments. Additionally, we will discuss the presumptions attached to certain types of documents and electronic records, as well as the exclusionary rules that limit the admissibility of oral evidence when it conflicts with documentary evidence.

    By delving into these topics, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the role and significance of oral and documentary evidence in the law of evidence. Whether you are a law student, a legal professional, or simply interested in gaining insights into the functioning of the legal system, this article will serve as a valuable resource.

    Throughout the article, we will examine specific sections of the law of evidence that pertain to oral and documentary evidence, highlighting their practical implications and legal ramifications. By shedding light on these aspects, we hope to contribute to a better understanding of the complex field of evidence law.

    So, join us as we navigate through the realm of oral and documentary evidence, exploring their nuances, limitations, and impact within the broader framework of the law of evidence. By the end of this article, you will have gained a deeper appreciation for the crucial role played by oral and documentary evidence in the pursuit of justice within the legal system.

    The law of evidence is a fundamental aspect of the legal system, governing the admissibility, weight, and interpretation of evidence presented in courts. In this blog article, we will explore the intricate aspects of oral and documentary evidence in relation to the law of evidence. Understanding these principles is essential for legal professionals, researchers, and individuals seeking knowledge about the legal system.

2. Presumptions as to Documents and Electronic Records (Sections 79-90A): 

    This section focuses on the presumptions associated with documents and electronic records as outlined in Sections 79 to 90A of the law of evidence. These presumptions help establish the authenticity, accuracy, and reliability of certain types of documents and electronic records. Each subsection within this section delves into a specific provision and its implications.

    The law of evidence recognizes the importance of documents and electronic records as reliable sources of information in legal proceedings. Sections 79 to 90A of the law outline various presumptions that are attached to documents and electronic records, which assist in establishing their authenticity, accuracy, and reliability. Each subsection within this section explores a specific provision and its implications, shedding light on the significance of these presumptions.

2.1 Section 79: Presumption of Genuineness of Certified Copies

    Section 79 of the law of evidence addresses the presumption of genuineness associated with certified copies of documents. This provision plays a vital role in facilitating the presentation of documents as evidence in legal proceedings by recognizing the authenticity and reliability of certified copies.

    When a document is required to be proved in court, producing the original document may not always be feasible or practical. In such cases, Section 79 allows for the admission of certified copies as evidence, presuming them to be true and authentic representations of the original document.

    The term "certified copy" refers to a copy of a document that has been verified and certified by an authorized person, such as a government official, notary public, or other designated individuals. This certification process ensures that the copy is a faithful reproduction of the original document.

    The presumption of genuineness attached to certified copies is based on the principle that the certified copy has been prepared in accordance with the prescribed procedures and safeguards. The certification acts as a guarantee of the accuracy and authenticity of the copy.

    By accepting certified copies as reliable substitutes for the original document, Section 79 simplifies the process of presenting evidence. It eliminates the need to produce and handle the original document, which may be susceptible to loss, damage, or other complications.

    The presumption of genuineness attached to certified copies is not absolute and can be rebutted by the opposing party. If the opposing party can provide evidence or raise doubts about the authenticity or accuracy of the certified copy, the court may scrutinize the copy more closely or require additional evidence to establish its genuineness.

    However, in the absence of any contrary evidence, the court will generally rely on the presumption of genuineness and admit the certified copy as evidence. This presumption allows for a smoother and more efficient legal process by reducing the burden of producing and verifying original documents.

    It is important to note that the presumption of genuineness attached to certified copies does not apply to all types of documents. Some documents may require specific additional requirements or procedures for certification, depending on the nature of the document and the relevant laws or regulations.

    In conclusion, Section 79 of the law of evidence introduces the presumption of genuineness for certified copies of documents. This provision simplifies the process of presenting evidence by accepting certified copies as reliable substitutes for the original document. However, the presumption is not absolute and can be challenged if there are genuine doubts about the authenticity or accuracy of the certified copy. Overall, the presumption of genuineness of certified copies enhances the efficiency and effectiveness of the legal system in handling documentary evidence.

2.2 Section 80: Presumption of Genuineness of Attested or Executed Documents

    Section 80 of the law of evidence introduces a presumption related to the genuineness of documents that are required by law to be attested or executed in a specific manner. This provision establishes that when such a document is presented as evidence in court, it shall be presumed to have been duly attested or executed as required, unless proven otherwise.

    The purpose of this presumption is to emphasize the importance of maintaining the integrity of evidentiary documents and to protect against challenges to their authenticity. Documents that are required to be attested or executed in a particular manner often involve legal formalities, such as signatures, seals, or witnessing by authorized individuals. The presumption in Section 80 ensures that these formalities are given due weight and significance.

    By presuming that the required attestation or execution formalities have been duly complied with, the court places a burden on the opposing party to provide evidence to the contrary. If the opposing party can demonstrate that the document was not attested or executed in the manner required by law, the presumption can be rebutted.

    This presumption serves multiple purposes in the legal system. First, it ensures that parties can rely on the authenticity and validity of documents that comply with the prescribed formalities. It promotes certainty and trust in legal transactions and proceedings.

    Second, the presumption protects against fraudulent or spurious documents. By placing the burden of proof on the party challenging the authenticity, the provision discourages false claims regarding the lack of proper attestation or execution.

    However, it is important to note that the presumption in Section 80 is not absolute. If evidence is presented that raises doubt about the proper attestation or execution of a document, the court may scrutinize it more closely and require additional evidence to establish its genuineness.

    Moreover, the presumption in Section 80 applies specifically to documents required by law to be attested or executed in a particular manner. It does not extend to documents that do not have such legal requirements. In those cases, the authenticity and validity of the document will be evaluated based on other relevant evidentiary principles.

    In summary, Section 80 establishes a presumption regarding the genuineness of documents that are required by law to be attested or executed in a specific manner. This presumption places the burden of proof on the party challenging the document's authenticity and emphasizes the importance of complying with legal formalities. It serves to maintain the integrity of evidentiary documents and protects against challenges to their authenticity, fostering trust and confidence in the legal system.

2.3 Section 81: Presumption of Accuracy and Authenticity of Official Documents

    Section 81 of the law of evidence introduces a set of presumptions pertaining to Gazettes, newspapers, private acts, and other official documents. This provision establishes that when these documents are published by the authority of the government or the relevant department, they are presumed to be accurate and genuine.

    The presumption outlined in Section 81 recognizes the reliability and authenticity of official documents in legal proceedings. It acknowledges that documents published by government authorities or through official channels are typically subjected to rigorous processes, scrutiny, and verification before their publication. As a result, they carry a presumption of accuracy and genuineness.

    The inclusion of Gazettes, newspapers, private acts, and other official documents under this provision highlights their significance in legal proceedings. These documents often contain important information, such as laws, regulations, public notices, or official announcements, which may be relevant to a case. By establishing a presumption of accuracy and authenticity, Section 81 simplifies the admission of such documents as evidence.

    When an official document falling under Section 81 is presented in court, the court will generally presume that the document is accurate and genuine, unless there is evidence to the contrary. The opposing party has the opportunity to challenge the document's accuracy or raise doubts about its authenticity by presenting contradictory evidence.

    It is important to note that the presumption under Section 81 is not absolute. The court has the authority to examine the document and evaluate its credibility based on the circumstances and the specific case. If there are valid reasons to doubt the accuracy or genuineness of the document, the court may scrutinize it more closely and require additional evidence to establish its reliability.

    Furthermore, the presumption in Section 81 applies specifically to documents published by the authority of the government or the relevant department. It does not automatically extend to all documents published in Gazettes, newspapers, or other official sources. The document must have been published through the proper channels and meet the criteria outlined in the provision to benefit from the presumption.

    In conclusion, Section 81 of the law of evidence introduces a presumption of accuracy and authenticity for Gazettes, newspapers, private acts, and other official documents published by the authority of the government or relevant department. This presumption recognizes the reliability and trustworthiness of such documents in legal proceedings. However, the presumption is not absolute and can be challenged if there is evidence to the contrary. Overall, Section 81 facilitates the admission of official documents as evidence and contributes to the efficiency and fairness of the legal system.

2.4 Section 82: Presumption of Admissibility of English Documents

    Section 82 of the law of evidence establishes a presumption regarding the admissibility of documents that are considered admissible in England. This provision states that if a document is admissible in England, it shall be presumed to be admissible in India as well, without requiring additional proof of seal or signature.

    The presumption outlined in Section 82 serves to simplify the process of admitting relevant documents in Indian courts. It recognizes the authority and validity of documents accepted in England, acknowledging their reliability and trustworthiness.

    By adopting this presumption, Indian courts can avoid the need for extensive authentication procedures for English documents. Instead, they can rely on the acceptance and admissibility of the document in the jurisdiction of England. This streamlines the evidentiary process and saves time and resources.

    It is important to note that the presumption in Section 82 applies to documents that are already admissible in England. This means that the document must meet the evidentiary requirements and standards set by English law. The presumption does not automatically apply to all documents originating from England but is limited to those deemed admissible under English legal principles.

    However, the presumption in Section 82 is not absolute. The opposing party can challenge the admissibility or authenticity of the document by presenting contrary evidence. If there are valid reasons to doubt the admissibility of the document or if it is necessary for the court to verify its authenticity, the court may request additional proof or examine the document more closely.

    Furthermore, it is essential to consider any specific requirements or procedures for the admissibility of foreign documents that may exist under Indian law. While Section 82 provides a general presumption, certain documents or categories of documents may still require additional authentication or verification in accordance with Indian legal requirements.

    In conclusion, Section 82 of the law of evidence introduces a presumption of admissibility for documents accepted in England. This presumption simplifies the process of admitting relevant documents in Indian courts by recognizing the authority and validity of English documents without requiring proof of seal or signature. However, the presumption is not absolute and can be challenged if there are valid reasons to question the admissibility or authenticity of the document. Overall, Section 82 contributes to the efficiency and effectiveness of the evidentiary process in cases involving English documents.

2.5 Section 83: Presumption of Accuracy of Government Maps or Plans

    Section 83 of the law of evidence introduces a presumption regarding the accuracy and authenticity of maps or plans made by government authorities. This provision recognizes such documents as reliable sources of geographical information and assumes their accuracy unless proven otherwise.

    Maps and plans created by government authorities play a crucial role in various legal matters, such as land disputes, infrastructure development, or environmental assessments. These documents are prepared by authorized agencies or departments with the expertise and resources to accurately depict geographical features, boundaries, or other relevant information.

    Section 83 acknowledges the reliability and trustworthiness of maps or plans produced by government authorities. It establishes a presumption that these documents are accurate and authentic, reducing the burden on parties to provide extensive evidence to establish their validity.

    The presumption in Section 83 is based on the assumption that government authorities are responsible for gathering and analyzing data, conducting surveys, and maintaining accurate records. Therefore, their maps or plans are considered to be accurate representations of the geographical features or boundaries they depict.

    However, it is important to note that the presumption in Section 83 is not absolute. If there is evidence to suggest errors, inaccuracies, or tampering with the map or plan, the opposing party can challenge its accuracy. The court may then scrutinize the document more closely or require additional evidence to assess its reliability.

    Furthermore, the presumption in Section 83 applies specifically to maps or plans made by government authorities. It does not extend to maps or plans created by private individuals or organizations unless they can establish their accuracy and authenticity through other means.

    In cases where the accuracy or authenticity of a government map or plan is contested, the court may consider factors such as the expertise of the government authority, the methodology used in creating the document, or any conflicting evidence presented by the parties.

    In conclusion, Section 83 establishes a presumption regarding the accuracy and authenticity of maps or plans made by government authorities. It recognizes these documents as reliable sources of geographical information and assumes their accuracy unless proven otherwise. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there is evidence to suggest errors or inaccuracies. Overall, Section 83 contributes to the efficiency and effectiveness of legal proceedings by acknowledging the reliability of government-produced maps or plans.

2.6 Section 84: Presumption of Accuracy of Collections of Laws and Reports

    Section 84 of the law of evidence establishes a presumption regarding the accuracy and authenticity of collections of laws and reports. This provision recognizes these compilations as trustworthy references in legal proceedings and presumes that they accurately represent the laws or reports they compile.

    Collections of laws and reports serve as essential resources for legal professionals, researchers, and individuals seeking knowledge about legal matters. These compilations gather and organize relevant laws, statutes, regulations, court decisions, or other legal documents, providing a comprehensive and accessible reference.

    Section 84 acknowledges the reliability and trustworthiness of collections of laws and reports. It establishes a presumption that these compilations accurately reflect the content and substance of the laws or reports they contain. This presumption simplifies the evidentiary process by allowing parties to rely on the compilation without having to produce each individual law or report as separate evidence.

    The presumption in Section 84 is based on the assumption that compilers of such collections undertake the responsibility of accurately gathering, organizing, and presenting legal information. They follow rigorous processes to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the compiled materials. Therefore, the court presumes that the compilation is an accurate and authentic representation of the laws or reports it contains.

    However, it is important to note that the presumption in Section 84 is not absolute. If there is evidence to suggest errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the compilation, the opposing party can challenge its accuracy. The court may then scrutinize the compilation more closely or require additional evidence to assess its reliability.

    Furthermore, the presumption in Section 84 applies specifically to collections of laws and reports. It does not extend to other types of compilations or reference materials unless they can establish their accuracy and authenticity through other means.

    In cases where the accuracy or authenticity of a collection of laws or reports is contested, the court may consider factors such as the reputation of the compiler, the sources and methodology used in creating the compilation, or any conflicting evidence presented by the parties.

    In conclusion, Section 84 establishes a presumption regarding the accuracy and authenticity of collections of laws and reports. It recognizes these compilations as reliable references in legal proceedings and assumes that they accurately represent the laws or reports they compile. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there is evidence to suggest errors or inaccuracies. Overall, Section 84 facilitates the efficiency and effectiveness of legal proceedings by acknowledging the reliability of collections of laws and reports.

2.7 Section 85: Presumption of Validity of Powers of Attorney

    Section 85 of the law of evidence addresses the presumption as to powers of attorney. This provision establishes that a power of attorney is presumed to be valid and executed with the requisite authority, unless proven otherwise. The presumption simplifies the admissibility and acceptance of powers of attorney as evidence in legal proceedings.

    A power of attorney is a legal document that grants authority to an individual (known as the attorney-in-fact or agent) to act on behalf of another person (known as the principal) in legal or financial matters. It allows the attorney-in-fact to make decisions, enter into contracts, or perform acts on behalf of the principal.

    Section 85 recognizes the significance of powers of attorney in legal proceedings and acknowledges their importance as evidence. By establishing a presumption of validity, the provision reduces the burden on parties to provide extensive evidence to prove the authenticity and authority of a power of attorney.

    The presumption in Section 85 is based on the principle that powers of attorney are typically executed with the requisite formalities and authority. It assumes that individuals who grant powers of attorney do so knowingly and with the intention to confer authority on the attorney-in-fact. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the court presumes that the power of attorney is valid and executed with the necessary authority.

    It is important to note that the presumption in Section 85 is not absolute. If there is evidence or reasonable doubt regarding the validity or authority of a power of attorney, the opposing party can challenge its validity. The court may then examine the document, consider the circumstances of its execution, and require additional evidence to ascertain its authenticity and authority.

    Furthermore, the presumption in Section 85 applies to the general validity and execution of powers of attorney. It does not address the scope or limitations of the powers granted under the document. Any disputes or questions regarding the specific powers conferred by the power of attorney will be determined based on the terms and provisions of the document itself.

    In conclusion, Section 85 establishes a presumption of validity and authority for powers of attorney. It simplifies the admissibility and acceptance of powers of attorney as evidence in legal proceedings by assuming their validity unless proven otherwise. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there is evidence to suggest the document's invalidity or lack of authority. Overall, Section 85 contributes to the efficiency and effectiveness of legal proceedings involving powers of attorney.

2.8 Section 86: Presumption of Genuineness of Certified Copies of Foreign Judicial Records

    Section 86 of the law of evidence introduces a presumption regarding the genuineness of certified copies of foreign judicial records. This provision recognizes the reliability and authenticity of such records and simplifies their admissibility in Indian courts without requiring additional proof.

    In legal proceedings, it is often necessary to rely on judicial records from foreign jurisdictions. These records include court orders, judgments, pleadings, or other legal documents that are generated and maintained by foreign judicial authorities. However, presenting original records from foreign jurisdictions may pose practical challenges, such as language barriers, logistical issues, or the need for authentication.

    Section 86 addresses these challenges by establishing a presumption of genuineness attached to certified copies of foreign judicial records. A certified copy is a copy of a document that has been authenticated by an authorized person, such as a court official or a notary, confirming that it is a true and accurate representation of the original document.

    The presumption in Section 86 recognizes that certified copies of foreign judicial records are reliable and authentic sources of information. It allows parties to present such copies as evidence in Indian courts without the need for additional proof of their genuineness. This simplifies the evidentiary process, saves time, and eliminates the requirement of obtaining and presenting the original records from the foreign jurisdiction.

    However, it is important to note that the presumption in Section 86 is not absolute. If there are reasonable grounds to doubt the genuineness or authenticity of a certified copy of a foreign judicial record, the opposing party can challenge its validity. The court may then scrutinize the document, consider any evidence or objections raised, and assess its reliability before accepting it as evidence.

    Furthermore, it is crucial to ensure that the certified copy meets the necessary requirements of certification under the law. The certification should be issued by a competent authority, clearly indicating that it is a true and accurate copy of the original foreign judicial record.

    In conclusion, Section 86 establishes a presumption of genuineness attached to certified copies of foreign judicial records. It recognizes the reliability and authenticity of such records, simplifying their admissibility in Indian courts without requiring additional proof. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there are reasonable grounds to doubt the genuineness or authenticity of the certified copy. Overall, Section 86 facilitates the efficient and effective presentation of foreign judicial records as evidence in Indian courts.

2.9 Section 87: Presumption of Correctness and Authenticity of Books, Maps, and Charts

    Section 87 of the law of evidence introduces a presumption regarding the correctness and authenticity of books, maps, and charts produced before the court. This provision establishes that when these documents are produced before the court as evidence, they are presumed to be accurate and genuine unless proven otherwise. This presumption recognizes the reliability of such documents as evidence in legal proceedings.

    Books, maps, and charts are commonly used as sources of information in various legal matters. They may contain factual data, historical records, scientific information, or other relevant content. Section 87 acknowledges the importance of these documents and assumes their correctness and authenticity when they are produced before the court.

    The presumption in Section 87 is based on the understanding that books, maps, and charts are typically prepared with care and accuracy. It assumes that the authors, publishers, or creators of these documents follow professional standards, conduct thorough research, and present reliable information. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the court presumes that the documents are accurate and genuine.

    The presumption in Section 87 applies when the books, maps, or charts are produced before the court as evidence. The party presenting these documents is not required to provide additional proof of their correctness or authenticity. This simplifies the evidentiary process by recognizing the inherent reliability of these documents and avoiding the need for extensive authentication procedures.

    However, it is important to note that the presumption in Section 87 is not absolute. If there are reasonable grounds to doubt the correctness or authenticity of a particular book, map, or chart, the opposing party can challenge its accuracy. The court may then examine the document, consider any evidence or objections raised, and assess its reliability before accepting it as evidence.

    Furthermore, it is essential to ensure that the books, maps, or charts are relevant to the matter at hand and meet the necessary standards of reliability. The court will consider factors such as the credibility of the source, the methodology used in creating the document, and any conflicting evidence presented by the parties.

    In conclusion, Section 87 establishes a presumption of correctness and authenticity for books, maps, and charts produced before the court. It recognizes the reliability of these documents as evidence and assumes their accuracy and genuineness unless proven otherwise. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there are reasonable grounds to doubt the correctness or authenticity of the document. Overall, Section 87 facilitates the efficient and effective use of books, maps, and charts as evidence in legal proceedings.

2.10 Section 88: Presumption of Accuracy and Integrity of Telegraphic Messages

    Section 88 of the law of evidence addresses the presumption regarding the accuracy and integrity of telegraphic messages. This provision establishes that telegraphic messages are presumed to be accurate and genuine if they were sent and received in the usual course of business. This presumption recognizes the reliability of telegraphic messages as evidence in legal proceedings.

    In today's digital age, telegraphic messages have been largely replaced by electronic communication methods such as emails, text messages, and instant messaging. However, Section 88 still holds relevance as it reflects the historical context and principles applicable to telegraphic messages.

    The presumption in Section 88 is based on the understanding that telegraphic messages, when sent and received in the usual course of business, are generally reliable and accurate. It assumes that telegraphic communication systems maintain the integrity of the messages during transmission and that the parties involved in the communication follow standard protocols and procedures.

    When a telegraphic message is offered as evidence in court, the presumption in Section 88 simplifies the evidentiary process. It allows the court to accept the message as accurate and genuine without requiring additional proof of its authenticity or reliability. This recognition of the reliability of telegraphic messages promotes efficiency and expedites legal proceedings.

    However, it is important to note that the presumption in Section 88 is not absolute. If there are reasonable grounds to doubt the accuracy or integrity of a specific telegraphic message, the opposing party can challenge its reliability. The court may then consider factors such as the circumstances of the transmission, any inconsistencies in the message, or any evidence presented to dispute its accuracy.

    Furthermore, the presumption in Section 88 applies when the telegraphic messages are sent and received in the usual course of business. If the messages are not part of the ordinary business communication or if there are indications of tampering or manipulation, the presumption may not apply, and the court may require additional evidence to establish the accuracy and authenticity of the messages.

    In conclusion, Section 88 establishes a presumption of accuracy and integrity for telegraphic messages sent and received in the usual course of business. It recognizes the reliability of such messages as evidence in legal proceedings, simplifying the evidentiary process. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there are reasonable grounds to doubt the accuracy or integrity of the specific telegraphic message. Overall, Section 88 contributes to the efficiency and effectiveness of using telegraphic messages as evidence in legal proceedings.

2.11 Section 89: Presumption of Authenticity and Accuracy of Documents Produced by a Public Servant

    Section 89 of the law of evidence addresses the presumption related to documents produced by a public servant. This provision establishes that documents purporting to be issued by a public servant are presumed to be genuine and accurate, unless proven otherwise. This presumption ensures the trustworthiness and reliability of documents issued by public servants in legal proceedings.

    Public servants, such as government officials, officers, or employees, often generate and issue various documents in the course of their official duties. These documents may include certificates, permits, licenses, reports, or other official records. Section 89 recognizes the importance of such documents and assumes their authenticity and accuracy when they are produced as evidence.

    The presumption in Section 89 is based on the principle that public servants are entrusted with the responsibility of maintaining official records and issuing documents in accordance with their duties and legal obligations. It assumes that public servants act with integrity and follow established procedures when generating and issuing documents.

    When a document purporting to be issued by a public servant is presented as evidence in court, the presumption in Section 89 simplifies the evidentiary process. It allows the court to accept the document as genuine and accurate without requiring additional proof of its authenticity or reliability. This recognition of the presumption ensures the trustworthiness and efficiency of documents issued by public servants in legal proceedings.

    However, it is important to note that the presumption in Section 89 is not absolute. If there are reasonable grounds to doubt the authenticity or accuracy of a particular document, the opposing party can challenge its validity. The court may then examine the document, consider any evidence or objections raised, and assess its reliability before accepting it as evidence.

    Furthermore, it is essential to ensure that the document in question falls within the purview of a public servant's official duties. The presumption in Section 89 applies specifically to documents generated and issued by public servants in their official capacity. Documents that do not fall under this category may not benefit from the same presumption and may require additional evidence to establish their authenticity and accuracy.

    In conclusion, Section 89 establishes a presumption of authenticity and accuracy for documents produced by a public servant. It recognizes the trustworthiness and reliability of such documents in legal proceedings, simplifying the evidentiary process. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there are reasonable grounds to doubt the authenticity or accuracy of the specific document. Overall, Section 89 contributes to the efficient and effective use of documents issued by public servants as evidence in legal proceedings.

2.12 Section 90: Presumption of Handwriting and Signature

    Section 90 of the law of evidence introduces the presumption of handwriting and signature. This provision establishes that when the court is required to form an opinion regarding the handwriting or signature of a person, any document alleged to be written or signed by that person is presumed to be in their handwriting or bearing their signature. This presumption simplifies the process of establishing the authenticity of handwriting and signatures in legal proceedings.

    Handwriting and signatures play a crucial role in various legal matters, such as verifying the identity of individuals, validating contracts, or determining authorship. Section 90 recognizes the significance of handwriting and signatures as distinctive personal characteristics and assumes that documents allegedly written or signed by a person reflect their actual handwriting or signature.

    The presumption in Section 90 is based on the understanding that individuals have unique handwriting styles and signatures that can be identified and compared. It assumes that the court can reasonably assess the similarity between the handwriting or signature on the disputed document and the known or admitted handwriting or signature of the person in question.

    When a document alleged to be written or signed by a person is presented as evidence in court, the presumption in Section 90 simplifies the evidentiary process. It allows the court to presume that the handwriting or signature on the document belongs to the person in question, without requiring additional proof of its authenticity. This recognition of the presumption expedites the establishment of the authenticity of handwriting and signatures.

    However, it is important to note that the presumption in Section 90 is not absolute. If there are reasonable grounds to doubt the authenticity of the handwriting or signature on the document, the opposing party can challenge its attribution. The court may then consider factors such as the expertise of handwriting experts, any inconsistencies in the handwriting or signature, or any evidence presented to dispute the alleged authorship.

    Furthermore, the presumption in Section 90 applies when the court is required to form an opinion regarding the handwriting or signature of a person. It is important to establish a prima facie case connecting the person in question to the document in order to invoke this presumption. If such a connection is not established, or if there are conflicting claims regarding the authorship of the document, the court may require additional evidence or expert testimony to determine the authenticity of the handwriting or signature.

    In conclusion, Section 90 establishes a presumption of handwriting and signature for documents alleged to be written or signed by a person. It simplifies the process of establishing the authenticity of handwriting and signatures in legal proceedings. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there are reasonable grounds to doubt the authenticity of the handwriting or signature. Overall, Section 90 contributes to the efficient and effective evaluation of handwriting and signatures as evidence in legal proceedings.

2.13 Section 90A: Presumption of Authenticity and Integrity of Electronic Records and Digital Signatures

    Section 90A of the law of evidence introduces the presumption of authenticity and integrity attached to electronic records and digital signatures. This provision acknowledges the significance of digital evidence in the modern era and establishes the reliability of electronic records and digital signatures, unless proven otherwise.

    In today's digital age, electronic records and digital signatures have become an integral part of various transactions and communications. These records and signatures are generated, stored, and transmitted electronically, providing convenience, efficiency, and security in the digital realm. Section 90A recognizes the importance of such digital evidence and assumes their authenticity and integrity in legal proceedings.

    The presumption in Section 90A is based on the understanding that electronic records and digital signatures are created and maintained using secure and reliable technologies and processes. It acknowledges that these records and signatures are often accompanied by robust security measures, encryption, and verification mechanisms to ensure their accuracy, reliability, and integrity.

    When electronic records or documents with digital signatures are presented as evidence in court, the presumption in Section 90A simplifies the evidentiary process. It allows the court to presume that the electronic records are authentic and have not been tampered with, and that the digital signatures are valid and belong to the purported signatory, unless there is evidence to the contrary. This recognition of the presumption facilitates the admissibility and acceptance of electronic records and digital signatures in legal proceedings.

    It is important to note that the presumption in Section 90A is not absolute. If there are reasonable grounds to doubt the authenticity or integrity of the electronic records or digital signatures, the opposing party can challenge their validity. The court may then consider factors such as the reliability of the technology used, the existence of any security breaches or manipulations, or any evidence presented to dispute their authenticity or integrity.

    Furthermore, the presumption in Section 90A operates in conjunction with the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (or relevant legislation in the jurisdiction). These laws govern the use, authentication, and admissibility of electronic records and digital signatures and provide a legal framework for their acceptance as evidence.

    In conclusion, Section 90A establishes a presumption of authenticity and integrity for electronic records and digital signatures. It recognizes the reliability and significance of digital evidence in the modern era, simplifying their admissibility and acceptance in legal proceedings. However, the presumption is subject to challenge if there are reasonable grounds to doubt the authenticity or integrity of the electronic records or digital signatures. Overall, Section 90A contributes to the efficient and effective use of electronic records and digital signatures as evidence in legal proceedings.

    Understanding these presumptions associated with documents and electronic records is crucial in assessing their evidentiary value and reliability. These presumptions simplify the process of admitting certain types of evidence, ensuring efficiency and fairness in legal proceedings.

3. Exclusion of Oral by Documentary Evidence (Sections 91-100)

    The section on the exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence, encompassing Sections 91 to 100 of the law of evidence, addresses the primacy of written documents and imposes restrictions on the admissibility of oral evidence in specific circumstances. These provisions emphasize the importance of documentary evidence and its ability to provide clarity, certainty, and reliability in legal proceedings.

    Written documents hold a special status in the legal system as they can provide a clear and permanent record of facts, agreements, transactions, and events. Sections 91 to 100 establish a framework that limits the admissibility of oral evidence when documentary evidence is available. This framework ensures consistency, promotes fairness, and avoids the potential uncertainties and unreliability associated with oral testimony.

These provisions serve several purposes, including:

a. Avoiding variations and contradictions: 

    Written documents offer a fixed and unambiguous account of information, reducing the risk of conflicting oral testimonies and enhancing the consistency and reliability of evidence. By excluding oral evidence when documentary evidence exists, the law seeks to minimize the potential for contradictory accounts.

b. Preserving the best evidence: 

    Documentary evidence is often considered the best evidence as it represents the original or firsthand account of events or agreements. By prioritizing written documents, the law ensures that the most reliable and accurate evidence is presented in court, preventing the introduction of potentially unreliable or altered oral testimony.

c. Preventing fraud and fabrication: 

    Written documents can be subject to rigorous scrutiny, verification, and authentication. By requiring parties to rely on documentary evidence rather than oral testimony, the law aims to prevent the potential for fraud, manipulation, or fabrication of facts that oral evidence might present.

d. Ensuring legal formalities and compliance: 

    Certain legal transactions or agreements require specific formalities, such as written contracts, wills, or deeds. The exclusion of oral evidence in favor of documentary evidence ensures that parties adhere to these formalities and provides legal certainty and enforceability to such transactions.

    The provisions within Sections 91 to 100 outline various scenarios where oral evidence is excluded or limited due to the availability of documentary evidence. These include situations involving contracts, grants, dispositions of property, terms of contracts, evidence of legislative history, and other specific circumstances where written documentation prevails over oral testimony.

    However, it is important to note that the exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence is not absolute. In certain exceptional cases, oral evidence may be permitted if it falls within the exceptions provided by law. These exceptions recognize situations where oral evidence may be necessary to supplement, explain, or interpret the contents of the documentary evidence.

    In conclusion, the section on the exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence, comprising Sections 91 to 100 of the law of evidence, underscores the significance of written documents and imposes limitations on the admissibility of oral evidence in specific circumstances. These provisions prioritize the reliability, clarity, and consistency offered by documentary evidence while allowing for exceptions when oral evidence is deemed necessary. By establishing this framework, the law ensures that legal proceedings are conducted based on the most reliable and authenticated evidence available.

3.1 Section 91: Exclusion of Oral Evidence to Contradict or Vary Written Contracts, Grants, or Dispositions of Property

    Section 91 of the law of evidence establishes a fundamental rule that oral evidence cannot be admitted to contradict, vary, or add to the terms of a written contract, grant, or other dispositions of property. This provision highlights the significance of honoring the terms and intentions expressed in written agreements and the limited role of oral testimony in altering or contradicting those terms.

    The rule set forth in Section 91 reflects the principle of contractual certainty and the importance of upholding the integrity of written documents. Written contracts, grants, and dispositions of property serve as formal and definitive expressions of the parties' intentions, rights, and obligations. By excluding oral evidence that contradicts or varies these written terms, the law ensures consistency, predictability, and reliability in legal transactions.

3.1.1 The rationale behind Section 91 is multifaceted:

a. Promoting contractual reliability: 

    The rule encourages parties to carefully negotiate and document their agreements in writing. By adhering to the terms set out in the written contract, all parties can rely on the clarity and certainty it provides, minimizing potential disputes or ambiguities that may arise from conflicting oral testimony.

b. Preventing fraud and disputes: 

    Allowing oral evidence to contradict or modify written contracts would create opportunities for fraud, misunderstandings, and disputes. By strictly limiting the admissibility of oral evidence, Section 91 reduces the risk of parties attempting to alter or manipulate the terms of a written agreement after its execution.

c. Facilitating legal enforcement: 

    Written contracts are typically subject to legal formalities and requirements, such as signatures, witnesses, or specific language. By excluding oral evidence that contradicts or varies these formalities, Section 91 ensures that parties comply with the prescribed legal procedures and safeguards, enhancing the enforceability of the written agreements.

d. Upholding the principle of best evidence: 

    Written contracts, grants, and dispositions of property are considered the best evidence of the parties' intentions and the terms of their agreements. By prohibiting oral evidence to contradict or vary these written terms, Section 91 prioritizes the highest-quality evidence available and avoids potential uncertainties or discrepancies that may arise from oral testimony.

    It is essential to note that Section 91 does not completely exclude oral evidence from legal proceedings. Oral evidence may still be admissible to interpret or explain the terms of a written contract or to establish facts surrounding its execution, such as allegations of fraud, mistake, or undue influence. However, oral evidence cannot be used to contradict or vary the terms of a written agreement itself.

    In conclusion, Section 91 emphasizes the significance of written contracts, grants, and dispositions of property by excluding oral evidence that contradicts, varies, or adds to their terms. This provision promotes contractual reliability, prevents fraud and disputes, facilitates legal enforcement, and upholds the principle of best evidence. By adhering to the rule set forth in Section 91, legal proceedings maintain consistency, predictability, and the integrity of written agreements.

3.2 Section 92: Exclusion of Oral Agreements to Contradict or Modify Written Contracts

    Section 92 of the law of evidence establishes a crucial rule that oral agreements cannot be admitted as evidence to contradict, vary, or modify the terms of a written contract. This provision upholds the primacy and importance of written documents in contractual matters, emphasizing that the terms of a written contract prevail over any prior oral agreements or understandings.

    The purpose of Section 92 is to ensure the clarity, certainty, and enforceability of written contracts by preventing parties from introducing oral evidence that would undermine or alter the terms agreed upon in writing. By enforcing this rule, the law promotes contractual reliability, minimizes disputes, and maintains the integrity of written agreements.

3.2.1 The key points regarding Section 92 are as follows:

a. Protecting the sanctity of written contracts: 

    Written contracts are considered binding legal documents that reflect the formal agreement between parties. By excluding oral agreements from contradicting or modifying written contracts, Section 92 protects the sanctity and finality of the written agreement. It reinforces the notion that parties are bound by the terms they have voluntarily and explicitly put in writing.

b. Ensuring contractual certainty and predictability: 

    The rule in Section 92 provides certainty and predictability in contractual relationships. Parties can rely on the written terms of the contract as the definitive expression of their intentions and obligations. This promotes stability and minimizes the risk of misunderstandings or disputes arising from contradictory oral agreements.

c. Preventing fraud and opportunistic behavior: 

    Allowing oral agreements to contradict or modify written contracts would open the door to potential fraud or opportunistic behavior. By excluding such oral evidence, Section 92 protects parties from deceptive practices where one party may attempt to deny or alter the agreed-upon terms based on alleged prior oral agreements.

d. Encouraging thoroughness in contract drafting: 

    Section 92 encourages parties to be diligent in capturing the entirety of their agreement within the written contract. It underscores the importance of carefully considering and documenting all relevant terms and conditions to avoid any reliance on oral agreements that could later create uncertainty or disputes.

    It is important to note that Section 92 does not render oral agreements completely irrelevant or inadmissible in all situations. Oral agreements may still be admissible as evidence to supplement or explain the written contract, to establish the existence of a separate collateral agreement, or to demonstrate fraud, mistake, duress, or undue influence. However, oral agreements cannot be used to contradict or modify the terms of a written contract.

    In conclusion, Section 92 of the law of evidence reinforces the primacy of written contracts by excluding oral agreements as evidence to contradict, vary, or modify the terms of a written contract. This provision promotes contractual certainty, protects against fraud, and encourages thoroughness in contract drafting. By upholding the rule set forth in Section 92, the legal system maintains the integrity and enforceability of written agreements.

3.3 Section 93: Exclusion of Oral Evidence to Explain Ambiguous Documents

    Section 93 of the law of evidence establishes a significant rule that oral evidence cannot be admitted to explain or amend an ambiguous document. This provision aims to maintain the integrity and clarity of written documents by preventing parties from introducing extraneous evidence to alter the interpretation of an ambiguous document.

3.3.1 The key points regarding Section 93 are as follows:

a. Preserving the objective interpretation of documents: 

    Section 93 upholds the principle that the interpretation of a document should be based on its text and the objective meaning derived from it. It discourages the introduction of oral evidence that may subjectively explain or amend an ambiguous document, as it may lead to varying interpretations and potential disputes.

b. Preventing attempts to manipulate document interpretation: 

    By excluding oral evidence to explain or amend an ambiguous document, Section 93 safeguards against attempts to manipulate or alter the meaning of a document by introducing external evidence. It encourages parties to rely on the text of the document itself, rather than subjective interpretations that can be influenced by individual perspectives or interests.

c. Promoting certainty and predictability in legal transactions: 

    The rule in Section 93 contributes to maintaining certainty and predictability in legal transactions. Parties can have confidence that the meaning of an ambiguous document will be determined objectively based on its written text, without the introduction of potentially conflicting oral evidence. This promotes stability and reduces the risk of disputes arising from differing interpretations.

d. Encouraging clear and unambiguous drafting: 

    Section 93 incentivizes parties to draft documents with clarity and precision to avoid ambiguity. It underscores the importance of careful wording and attention to detail in order to minimize the need for subsequent oral explanations or amendments. Parties are encouraged to express their intentions clearly within the written document itself to prevent potential misunderstandings or disputes.

    It is important to note that Section 93 does not render all oral evidence irrelevant or inadmissible in relation to documents. Oral evidence may still be admissible in certain situations, such as when it is used to establish the existence of a separate collateral agreement, to prove fraud, mistake, or misrepresentation, or to demonstrate a subsequent oral modification of the document.

    In conclusion, Section 93 of the law of evidence excludes oral evidence from being admitted to explain or amend an ambiguous document. This provision supports the objective interpretation of documents, prevents attempts to manipulate document meaning, promotes certainty in legal transactions, and encourages clear and unambiguous drafting. By upholding the rule set forth in Section 93, the legal system ensures the integrity and clarity of written documents.

3.4 Section 94: Exclusion of Oral Evidence to Disprove Applicability of Document Terms

    Section 94 of the law of evidence plays a crucial role in maintaining the integrity and enforceability of written documents by establishing that oral evidence cannot be admitted to prove that the terms of a document do not apply to existing facts. This provision prevents attempts to undermine the applicability of a document based on oral statements or assertions.

3.4.1 The key points regarding Section 94 are as follows:

a. Protecting the sanctity of written agreements: 

    Section 94 reinforces the principle that the terms of a written document, once executed, are binding on the parties involved. It prohibits the introduction of oral evidence to challenge the applicability of these terms to existing facts. By upholding the primacy of written agreements, this provision ensures the reliability and predictability of contractual relationships.

b. Preventing attempts to alter contractual obligations: 

    The rule set forth in Section 94 prevents parties from attempting to disprove the applicability of the terms in a written document by relying on oral statements or understandings. This provision aims to discourage parties from trying to escape their contractual obligations or reinterpret the terms based on subsequent oral discussions.

c. Upholding the objective interpretation of documents: 

Section 94 reinforces the objective interpretation of written documents. It encourages parties to rely on the explicit terms and provisions within the document itself, rather than attempting to introduce oral evidence to undermine or reinterpret those terms. This promotes consistency and minimizes the risk of disputes arising from subjective interpretations or attempts to alter the agreement.

d. Fostering contractual certainty and enforceability: 

By excluding oral evidence to disprove the applicability of document terms, Section 94 contributes to contractual certainty and enforceability. Parties can have confidence that the terms agreed upon in writing will be upheld and respected, reducing the potential for ambiguity or disagreement regarding their contractual obligations.

    It is important to note that Section 94 does not render all oral evidence irrelevant or inadmissible. Oral evidence may still be admissible to establish fraud, mistake, misrepresentation, or duress regarding the execution or formation of the document. Additionally, oral evidence may be admissible to prove subsequent oral modifications to the terms of the document.

    In conclusion, Section 94 of the law of evidence excludes oral evidence from being admitted to prove that the terms of a document do not apply to existing facts. This provision protects the sanctity of written agreements, prevents attempts to alter contractual obligations through oral statements, upholds the objective interpretation of documents, and fosters contractual certainty and enforceability.

3.5 Section 95: Exclusion of Oral Evidence to Establish Meaning of a Meaningless Document

Section 95 of the law of evidence plays a significant role in maintaining the integrity and reliability of written documents. It establishes that oral evidence cannot be admitted to establish the meaning of a document that is meaningless when applied to existing facts. This provision emphasizes the importance of relying on the document itself to derive its intended meaning.

3.5.1 The key points regarding Section 95 are as follows:

a. Importance of the document's inherent meaning: 

    Section 95 recognizes that a document should be capable of conveying its intended meaning on its own. It upholds the principle that the interpretation of a document should primarily rely on its own text and context, without the need for extraneous oral evidence. This ensures that the document's inherent meaning is given precedence.

b. Prevention of contradictory interpretations: 

    By excluding oral evidence to establish the meaning of a meaningless document, Section 95 aims to prevent contradictory interpretations or subjective attempts to infuse meaning into a document that does not make sense in light of existing facts. This provision promotes consistency and reduces the risk of disputes arising from conflicting interpretations.

c. Preservation of the document's objective character: 

    Section 95 emphasizes the objective character of a document. It discourages parties from relying on oral evidence to alter or supplement the document's meaning based on their subjective understanding or intentions. By adhering to the document's language and objective meaning, this provision ensures clarity and predictability in legal proceedings.

d. Promotion of legal certainty and reliance on written agreements: 

    The rule set forth in Section 95 contributes to legal certainty and encourages parties to place reliance on written agreements. By excluding oral evidence to establish the meaning of a meaningless document, parties can have confidence in the clear and unambiguous terms expressed within the document itself.

    It is important to note that Section 95 does not render all oral evidence irrelevant or inadmissible in relation to document interpretation. Oral evidence may still be admissible to explain any ambiguity in the document, to establish the purpose for which the document was created, or to demonstrate a subsequent oral modification to the document's terms.

    In conclusion, Section 95 of the law of evidence excludes oral evidence from being admitted to establish the meaning of a document that is meaningless when applied to existing facts. This provision upholds the importance of relying on the document's inherent meaning, prevents contradictory interpretations, preserves the document's objective character, and promotes legal certainty and reliance on written agreements.

3.6 Section 96: Exclusion of Oral Evidence for Selective Interpretation of Language in a Document

    Section 96 of the law of evidence serves as a crucial safeguard to maintain the integrity and fairness of document interpretation. It establishes that oral evidence cannot be admitted to establish the application of language in a document to a particular set of facts when it does not apply entirely to either set of facts. This provision prevents selective interpretation or cherry-picking of language in a document to suit a party's interests.

3.6.1 The key points regarding Section 96 are as follows:

a. Objective interpretation of the document: 

    Section 96 underscores the objective approach to document interpretation. It ensures that the language within a document is interpreted in its entirety and without selective bias. The provision prevents parties from selectively highlighting specific phrases or provisions in the document to suit their own purposes, disregarding the overall context or the document's intended meaning.

b. Avoidance of misrepresentation or distortion: 

    By excluding oral evidence for selective interpretation, Section 96 aims to prevent the misrepresentation or distortion of the language in a document. This provision maintains the integrity of the document and prevents parties from manipulating its content to create a false narrative or to assert a meaning that is not supported by the document as a whole.

c. Promoting consistency and predictability: 

    Section 96 contributes to consistency and predictability in legal proceedings by ensuring that the application of language in a document is based on objective standards rather than subjective preferences. This provision promotes fairness and avoids the risk of different interpretations based on a party's selective use of language.

d. Preservation of the document's intended scope: 

    Section 96 safeguards the intended scope and purpose of the document. It prevents parties from extending or limiting the application of the document's language to fit a particular set of facts when it does not entirely apply. By adhering to the language as a whole, this provision preserves the document's original intent and maintains its overall coherence.

    It is important to note that Section 96 does not prohibit the use of oral evidence to clarify or explain the meaning of language within a document. Oral evidence may still be admissible to shed light on the context, background, or understanding of the parties involved in creating the document, as long as it does not contradict or modify the clear language of the document itself.

    In conclusion, Section 96 of the law of evidence excludes oral evidence from being admitted to establish the selective application of language in a document to a particular set of facts when it does not apply entirely. This provision promotes objective document interpretation, prevents misrepresentation or distortion, ensures consistency and predictability, and preserves the document's intended scope.

3.7 Section 97: Consistency in the Interpretation of Language in a Document

    Section 97 of the law of evidence plays a significant role in maintaining consistency and uniformity in the interpretation of language within a document. It establishes that oral evidence cannot be admitted to establish the application of language in a document to one set of facts when it is equally applicable to both sets. This provision ensures that the interpretation of the document remains consistent and avoids the risk of conflicting interpretations based on subjective oral evidence.

3.7.1 Here are the key points related to Section 97:

a. Objective interpretation of the document: 

    Section 97 underscores the importance of interpreting the language within a document objectively. It prevents parties from introducing oral evidence to selectively apply the language to one set of facts while ignoring its applicability to another set. By upholding the consistency in interpretation, this provision promotes fairness and avoids potential bias in legal proceedings.

b. Avoidance of contradictory interpretations: 

    The exclusion of oral evidence under Section 97 prevents contradictory interpretations of the document. It ensures that the language is applied consistently to both sets of facts when it is equally relevant and applicable. This provision eliminates the risk of parties presenting oral evidence to support different interpretations, thereby maintaining the integrity and coherence of the document.

c. Promotion of certainty and predictability: 

Section 97 contributes to legal certainty and predictability by establishing a clear rule for the interpretation of language in a document. Parties can rely on the written terms of the document without the uncertainty and ambiguity that may arise from the introduction of oral evidence. This provision provides a framework for consistent interpretation, making it easier for parties to understand and assess their rights and obligations under the document.

d. Preservation of the document's intended application: 

    By excluding oral evidence to establish selective application of language, Section 97 ensures that the document's intended application remains intact. It prevents parties from manipulating or distorting the interpretation to favor their interests. The provision upholds the integrity of the document by considering its language as a whole and maintaining its intended scope.

    It is important to note that Section 97 does not preclude the admissibility of oral evidence for other purposes, such as clarifying the context or understanding of the parties involved in creating the document. However, it restricts the use of oral evidence to establish the selective application of language when it is equally applicable to both sets of facts.

    In conclusion, Section 97 of the law of evidence excludes oral evidence from being admitted to establish the application of language in a document to one set of facts when it is equally applicable to both sets. This provision promotes consistency, avoids contradictory interpretations, enhances legal certainty, and preserves the document's intended application.

3.8 Section 98: Admissibility of Oral Evidence to Determine Illegible Characters or Words

    Section 98 of the law of evidence addresses a specific scenario where a document contains illegible characters or words that are difficult to decipher. This provision allows the court to exercise flexibility by admitting oral evidence to determine the meaning of such illegible content. The objective is to ensure a fair and accurate interpretation of the document despite the presence of illegible elements.

3.8.1 Here are the key points related to Section 98:

a. Addressing challenges of illegible content: 

    In some cases, a document may have illegible characters or words due to factors like damage, age, poor quality, or other reasons. Section 98 recognizes this challenge and acknowledges that the presence of illegible content may hinder the proper interpretation of the document. By allowing the court to consider oral evidence, it provides a means to overcome this limitation and arrive at a reasonable understanding of the document's intended meaning.

b. Determining the meaning of illegible characters or words: 

    Section 98 enables the court to consider oral evidence to ascertain the intended meaning of illegible characters or words. This may involve the testimony of individuals who were involved in the creation or execution of the document or who possess relevant knowledge or expertise. The court may rely on their input to shed light on the context, intention, or possible alternatives regarding the illegible content.

c. Balancing fairness and accuracy: 

    The purpose of admitting oral evidence under Section 98 is to strike a balance between fairness and accuracy in interpreting the document. By considering oral evidence in cases of illegible content, the court aims to ensure that the true intent and meaning of the document are not lost or distorted. This provision acknowledges that the document's significance should not be undermined solely because of illegible portions.

d. Limitations and caution: 

    While Section 98 allows for the admission of oral evidence, it is important to exercise caution in assessing such evidence. The court must evaluate the credibility, relevance, and consistency of the oral testimony presented to determine the meaning of the illegible characters or words. Additionally, the court should consider the overall context, purpose, and other available evidence in arriving at a reasonable interpretation.

    It is essential to note that Section 98 specifically addresses the issue of illegible content and allows for the use of oral evidence in such circumstances. However, it does not imply a general admissibility of oral evidence to modify or contradict the written terms of a document. The provision is limited in scope and intended to address the specific challenge of illegibility.

    In conclusion, Section 98 of the law of evidence permits the court to admit oral evidence for determining the meaning of illegible characters or words in a document. It strikes a balance between fairness and accuracy by considering additional information to interpret the document correctly when faced with challenges of illegibility.

3.9 Section 99: Admissibility of Oral Evidence by Parties with Direct Interest

    Section 99 of the law of evidence addresses the admissibility of oral evidence to establish an agreement that varies the terms of a document. It sets forth a specific rule regarding the individuals who can provide such oral evidence. According to this provision, only parties to the contract or persons who have a direct interest in the matter are allowed to present oral evidence to establish an agreement that modifies or alters the terms of a document.

3.9.1 Here are the key points related to Section 99:

a. Limited admissibility: 

    Section 99 restricts the admissibility of oral evidence to establish a variation in the terms of a document. It recognizes that written documents serve as reliable evidence of the parties' intentions and agreements. However, in certain situations, the parties may have reached a subsequent agreement that alters the original terms of the document. In such cases, Section 99 allows for the admission of oral evidence, but only by parties to the contract or individuals with a direct interest in the matter.

b. Parties to the contract: 

    The provision grants admissibility to oral evidence provided by parties who are directly involved in the contractual agreement. These individuals have firsthand knowledge of the agreement and can testify about any modifications or variations made to the terms of the document. Their testimony can help establish the existence and nature of the altered agreement.

c. Persons with direct interest: 

    Section 99 extends the scope of admissibility to individuals who have a direct interest in the matter at hand. While not necessarily parties to the contract, these individuals may have a vested interest in the outcome of the contractual arrangement. Their oral evidence can shed light on any modifications or variations made to the terms of the document and help ascertain the true agreement between the parties.

d. Objective of ensuring reliability and fairness: 

    The underlying objective of Section 99 is to balance the need for reliability and fairness in contract interpretation. It recognizes that oral evidence can be crucial in cases where parties have agreed to modify or alter the terms of a written document. By limiting the admissibility to parties and individuals with a direct interest, the provision aims to prevent unwarranted disputes and maintain the integrity of written agreements.

e. Compliance with legal formalities: 

    It is important to note that Section 99 does not disregard the requirement of complying with legal formalities. Any variations or modifications to a document must still meet the necessary legal requirements, such as being in writing or fulfilling other specific conditions. Section 99 only addresses the admissibility of oral evidence to establish the existence of such variations or modifications.

    In conclusion, Section 99 of the law of evidence allows for the admissibility of oral evidence to establish an agreement that varies the terms of a document. However, this provision restricts the presentation of oral evidence to parties to the contract or individuals with a direct interest in the matter. By doing so, it aims to ensure reliability and fairness in contract interpretation while maintaining the importance of written agreements.

3.10 Section 100: Saving of Provisions of Indian Succession Act on Wills

    Section 100 of the law of evidence is an important provision that saves the provisions of the Indian Succession Act related to the execution and proof of wills. This section ensures the continued applicability and relevance of specific provisions governing wills, as outlined in the Indian Succession Act.

3.10.1 Here are the key points related to Section 100:

a. Saving provision: 

    Section 100 serves as a saving provision for the Indian Succession Act, specifically regarding the execution and proof of wills. It implies that the provisions related to wills as prescribed in the Indian Succession Act remain unaffected and are not overridden by the provisions of the law of evidence.

b. Applicability of the Indian Succession Act: 

    The Indian Succession Act, enacted in 1925, provides comprehensive provisions governing wills, intestacy, and succession in India. Section 100 ensures the continued applicability and validity of the provisions within the Indian Succession Act that pertain to the execution and proof of wills.

c. Execution of wills: 

    The Indian Succession Act sets forth the requirements and procedures for the valid execution of a will. It specifies the necessary formalities, such as the presence of witnesses, the attestation of the testator's signature, and the proper revocation of previous wills. Section 100 saves these provisions, emphasizing their continued importance in establishing the validity of wills.

d. Proof of wills: 

    The Indian Succession Act also contains provisions relating to the proof of wills. It outlines the methods and requirements for proving the authenticity and validity of a will in court. These provisions ensure that the court can assess the genuineness of the document and determine its legal effect. Section 100 ensures that these provisions remain in force and applicable when it comes to proving the validity of wills.

e. Cohesiveness with the law of evidence: 

    While the law of evidence encompasses broader principles governing the admissibility and weight of evidence, Section 100 recognizes the need to preserve the specific provisions related to wills outlined in the Indian Succession Act. It harmonizes the two bodies of law, ensuring that the provisions concerning wills in the Indian Succession Act continue to be recognized and followed.

    In summary, Section 100 of the law of evidence serves as a saving provision for the provisions of the Indian Succession Act related to the execution and proof of wills. It ensures the continued applicability and validity of these provisions, maintaining their importance in establishing the execution and validity of wills. By saving the relevant provisions of the Indian Succession Act, Section 100 harmonizes the law of evidence with the specific laws governing wills.

4. Conclusion:

    In conclusion, the law of evidence pertaining to oral and documentary evidence plays a vital role in ensuring the fairness and integrity of the legal system. The provisions discussed in this article shed light on the presumptions attached to various types of documents and electronic records, as well as the limitations on the admissibility of oral evidence in certain situations.

    The presumptions outlined in Sections 79-90A recognize the authenticity, accuracy, and reliability of certified copies of documents, government publications, maps, collections of laws, telegraphic messages, and more. These presumptions simplify the process of presenting such documents as evidence in court, eliminating the need for extensive proof of their genuineness.

    On the other hand, Sections 91-100 emphasize the primacy of written documents and limit the admissibility of oral evidence. These provisions prevent oral evidence from contradicting, varying, or modifying the terms of a written contract or document. They also restrict the use of oral evidence to explain ambiguous documents or to establish facts that are inconsistent with the terms of a document.

    Understanding these provisions is crucial for legal professionals, researchers, and individuals involved in legal matters. It enables them to navigate the complexities of presenting and challenging evidence effectively. By recognizing the importance of written documents and establishing presumptions regarding their authenticity, the law of evidence ensures a fair and efficient legal process.

    In a world where electronic records and digital signatures are increasingly prevalent, the recognition of their authenticity and integrity, as stipulated in Section 90A, is particularly significant. This provision reflects the evolving nature of evidence in the digital age and provides a framework for accepting electronic records and digital signatures as reliable forms of evidence.

    In conclusion, a comprehensive understanding of the law of evidence regarding oral and documentary evidence is essential for legal professionals to build strong cases, for researchers to conduct thorough analyses, and for individuals to navigate legal proceedings effectively. By upholding the importance of written documents and establishing presumptions regarding their authenticity, the law of evidence ensures the credibility and reliability of evidence presented in courts.

5. References:

1. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
2. Kumar, V., & Maheshwari, S. N. (2019). Law of Evidence. Central Law Agency.
3. Sharma, A. V. (2018). The Indian Evidence Act: Act No. 1 of 1872. Commercial Law Publishers.
4. Pandey, S. N. (2020). Law of Evidence. Central Law Agency.
5. Garg, S., & Garg, P. (2019). A Textbook on the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Lexis Nexis.
6. Ratanlal & Dhirajlal. (2020). The Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Lexis Nexis.
7. Puri, K. N. (2021). Law of Evidence. Bharat Law House.
8. Aggarwal, D. P., & Bhavani, R. N. (2021). The Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Commercial Law Publishers.
9. Sinha, P. (2019). Law of Evidence. Universal Law Publishing.
10. India Code (Website): https://indiacode.nic.in/

    Please note that the above references are provided as examples and it is recommended to consult authoritative sources and legal texts for further study and accurate information.