Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons
AI Assist
Summary
When wording could reasonably refer to any one of several persons or things but cannot mean more than one, evidence may be given to show which specific person or thing was intended. It applies where language is ambiguous among alternatives. The consequence is the court can identify the correct person or thing to which the legal effect attaches.
Example
Ravi agrees to sell to Priya "my white cow." Ravi owns two white cows. Evidence such as where each cow is kept and which one Ravi usually took to market can be given to show which cow was meant, so the sale is enforced for that particular cow.
Bare Act
Enacted textWhen the facts are such that the language used might have been meant to apply to 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 those persons or things it was intended to apply to.
Illustrations
-
(a) A agrees to sell to B, for Rs. 1,000, my white horse. A has two white horses. Evidence may be given of facts which show which of them was meant.
-
(b) A agrees to accompany B to Hyderabad. Evidence may be given of facts showing whether Haidarabad in the Dekkhan or Haidarabad in Sindh was meant.
Previous year papers
Pick your exam. we'll email the most recent paper.