When the terms of a contract, or of a grant or any other disposition of property, have been reduced to a form of document, and in all cases in which any matter is required by law to be reduced to the form of a document, no evidence shall be given in proof of the terms of such contract, grant or other disposition of property or of such matter, except the document itself, or secondary evidence of its contents, in cases in which secondary evidence is admissible under the provisions herein after contained.

Exceptions

1. When a public officer is required by law to be appointed in writing, and when it is shown that any particular person has acted as such officer, the writing by which he is appointed need not be proved.

2. Wills admitted to probate in India may be proved by the probate.

Explanation:

1. This Section applies equally to cases in which the contracts or grants or dispositions of property referred to are contained in one document and to cases in which they are contained in more documents than one.

2. Where there are more originals than one, one original only need be proved.

3. The statement in any document whatever, of a fact other than the facts referred to in this Section, shall not preclude the admission of oral evidence as to the same fact.

Illustrations:

1. If a contract be contained in several letters, all the letters in which it is contained must be proved.

2. If a contract is contained in a bill of exchange, the bill of exchange must be proved.

3. If a bill of exchange is drawn in a set of three, one only needs to be proved.

4. A contracts in writing, with B for the delivery of indigo upon certain terms. The contract mentions the fact that B had paid A the price of other indigo contracted for verbally on another occasion. Oral evidence was offered that no payment was made for the other indigo. The evidence is admissible.

5. A gives B a receipt for money paid by B. Oral evidence is offered of the payment. The evidence is admissible.

When the terms of any such contract, grant or other disposition of property, or any matter required by law to be reduced to the form of a document, have been proved according to the last Section (Section 91), no evidence of any oral agreement or statement shall be admitted, as between the party to such instrument or their representatives in interest, for the purpose of contradicting, varying, adding to, or subtracting from, its terms :

Proviso

1. Any fact may be proved which would invalidate any document, or which would entitle any person to any decree or order relating thereto; such as fraud, intimidation, illegality, want of due execution, want of capacity in any contracting party, want of failure of consideration, or mistake in fact or law

2. The existence of any separate oral agreement as to any matter on which a document is silent, and which is not inconsistent with its terms, may be proved. In considering whether or not this proviso applies, the Court shall have regard to the degree of formality of the document.

3. The existence of any separate oral agreement, constituting a condition precedent to the attaching of any obligation under any such contract, grant or disposition of property, may be proved.

4. The existence of any distinct subsequent oral agreement to rescind or modify such oral contract, grant or disposition of property, may be proved, except incases, in which such contract, grant or disposition of property is by law required to be in writing, or has been registered according to the law in force for the time being as to the registration of documents,

5. Any usage or custom by which incidents not expressly mentioned in any contract are usually annexed to contracts of that description, may be proved.

Provided that the annexing of such incident would not be repugnant to, or inconsistent with, the express terms of the contract.

6. Any fact may be proved which shows in what manner the language of a document is related to existing facts

When the language used in the document is, on its face, ambiguous or defective, evidence may not be given of facts, which would show its meaning or supply its defects.

Illustrations:

1. A agrees, in writing, to sell a horse to B for "Rs.1000 or Rs.1500. Evidence cannot be given to show which price was to be given.

2. A deed contains blanks. Evidence cannot be given of facts, which would show how they were meant to be filled.

When the language used in a document is plain in itself, and when it applies accurately to existing facts, evidence may not be given to show that it was not meant to apply such facts.

Illustration:

A sells to B by deed, "my estate at Rampur containing 100 bighas". A has an estate at Rampur containing 100 bighas. Evidence may not be given that the estate meant to be sold was one situated at a different place and of a different size.

When language used in a document is plain in itself, but is unmeaning to references to existing facts, evidence may be given to show that it was used in peculiar sense.

A sells B by deed my house in Calcutta. A had no house at Calcutta, but it appears he had a house at Howrah, of which B had been in possession since the execution of the deed. These facts may be proved to show that the deed related to the house at Calcutta.

When the facts are such that the language used might have been meant to apply for any one, and could not have been meant to apply to more than one, of several persons or things, evidence may be given of facts which show which of these persons or things it was intended to apply to.

Illustrations:

1. A agrees to sell to B for Rs.1000 "my white horse". A has two white horses. Evidence may be given of facts, which show, which of them was meant.

2. A agrees to accompany B to Haidarabad. Evidence may be given of facts showing whether Haidarabad in Deccan or Haidarabad in Sind was meant.

When the language used applies partly to one set of existing facts, and partly to another set of existing facts, but the whole of it does not apply correctly to either, may be given show to which of the two it was meant to apply.

Illustration:

A offers to sell to B "my land at X in the occupation of Y". A has land at X, but not in the occupation of Y, and he has land in the occupation of Y, but it is not X. Evidence may be given of facts showing which he meant to sell.

Evidence may be given to show the meaning of illegible and not commonly intelligible characters, of foreign, obsolete, technical, local, and provincial expressions, of abbreviations and of words used in a peculiar sense.

Persons, who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence of the fact tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document.

Illustration:

A and B make a contract in writing that B shall sell A certain cotton, to be paid for on delivery. At the same time they make an oral agreement that three months' credit shall be given to A. This could not be shown as between A and B, but it might be shown by C, as it affected his interest,/P>