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
IEA, 1872
Start Practicing
IEAChapter VISection 94
Section94

Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts

AI Assist

Summary

When a document uses plain words that accurately describe existing facts, outside evidence cannot be used to show those words were not meant to apply. Courts will exclude testimony or papers that contradict a clear written description. This preserves the written meaning of the document.

Example

Ravi executes a deed selling to Priya "my house at Rampur containing 100 bighas." Ravi actually owns that house at Rampur with 100 bighas. Priya cannot introduce evidence that the seller meant a different property; the clear words of the deed control.

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.

Illustrations

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 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 or Documentary Evidence

In this chapter

  • 91Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of document
  • 92Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement
  • 93Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous document
  • 94Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts
  • 95Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts
  • 96Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons
  • 97Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the whole correctly applies
  • 98Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc
  • 99Who may give evidence of agreement varying term of document
  • 100Saving of provisions of Indian Succession Act relating to wills
Previous · Section 93Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous documentNext · Section 95Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts