LawpatraLawpatra.ai

Lawpatra is an AI-powered legal education platform designed to help aspirants crack premier law entrance and judiciary examinations. With adaptive mock tests, precision analytics, and 24/7 personalized AI tutoring, we provide a comprehensive ecosystem for your entire legal career journey.

Test series on the goGoogle Play

Explore

  • Prepare for our exams
  • Bare Acts
  • Blog
  • Download resources

Company

  • About
  • Careers
  • Contact us

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Account deletion

Product

  • AI Tutor
  • Features
  • How it works

Law Entrances

  • CLAT
  • CLAT PG
  • AILET
  • SLAT
  • MH CET Law

Judiciary

  • MPSC Civil Judge
  • Chhattisgarh Judiciary
  • OPSC Civil Judge
  • Gujarat Judiciary
  • Delhi Judicial Services
  • UP PCS-J
  • Rajasthan Judiciary Service

APO/ADPO

  • Bihar APO
  • Delhi APP
  • Haryana ADA
  • Madhya Pradesh ADPO
  • Rajasthan APO
  • Uttar Pradesh APO
  • Uttarakhand APO

Bare Acts

  • BNS
  • BNSS
  • BSA
  • IPC
  • CrPC
  • IEA
  • HMA
  • IDA
  • MVA

© 2026 Blingwork Technologies Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved.

Offices: Hyderabad & Jodhpur

LawpatraLawpatra
BSA, 2023
Start Practicing
BSAChapter VISection 97
Section97

Exclusion of Evidence against application of document to existing facts

AI Assist

Summary

When the words of a document are plain and accurately describe existing facts, the court will not allow evidence that the parties meant something else. This applies where a written description clearly matches a property or other existing thing. The written words control, and extrinsic evidence to change their meaning is barred.

Example

Ravi sells to Priya by deed stating "my field at Rampur containing one hundred bighas" and he actually owns that Rampur field. They cannot introduce evidence that he really meant to sell a different field in another village. The deed's plain words control, so the sale covers the Rampur field as written.

Bare Act

Enacted text

When 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 to such facts.

Illustration.

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

Keep going
Newsletter

Join the top 1% of law aspirants

Get weekly high-yield legal updates, landmark judgment breakdowns, and smart prep strategies sent straight to your inbox.

We never share your email.

Previous year papers

Pick your exam. we'll email the most recent paper.

Download previous year papers

For

We'll never share your email. Promise.

VI

Chapter VI

Of The Exclusion of Oral Evidence by Documentary Evidence

In this chapter

  • 94Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of document
  • 95Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement
  • 96Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous document
  • 97Exclusion of Evidence against application of document to existing facts
  • 98Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts
  • 99Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons
  • 100Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the whole correctly applies
  • 101Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc
  • 102Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document
  • 103Saving of provisions of Indian Succession Act relating to wills
Previous · Section 96Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous documentNext · Section 98Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts