THE
QANUN‑E‑SHAHADAT
ORDER, 1984
(X
OF 1894). [28th October, 1984)
CHAPTER
VI
OF
THE EXCLUSION OF ORAL BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
103. Exclusion of evidence of oral
agreement. 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 Article, no evidence of any
oral agreement or statement shall be admitted, as between the parties to any
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 or failure of
consideration, or mistake in fact or law.
Proviso (2).‑‑The existence of
any separate oral agreement as to any matter on which a document is sillent, 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.
Proviso (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.
Proviso (4).‑‑The existence of
any distinct subsequent oral agreement to rescind or modify and such contract,
grant, or disposition of property, may be proved, except in cases 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.
Proviso (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.
Proviso (6)‑‑Any
fact may be proved which shows in what manner the language of a document is
related to existing facts.
Illustrations
(a) a
policy of insurance is effected on goods "in ships from
(b)
A, agrees absolutely in writing to pay B Rs. 1,000 on
the first March, 1984. The fact that, at the same time, ari
oral agreement was made that the money should not be paid oil the thirty first
March cannot be proved.
(c) An estate called
"the Khanpur estate" is sold by a deed which contain a map of the property sold. the fact that land not included in the map had always been
regarded as part of the .estate and was meant to pass by the deed cannot be
proved.
(d) A enters into a written
contract with B to work certain unless, the property of B, upon certain terms.
A was induced to do so by a misrepresentation of B's as to their value. This
fact may be proved.
(e) A institutes a suit
against B for the specified performance of a contract, and also prays that the
contract may be reformed as to one of its provisions, a3 the provision was
inserted in it by. mistake. A may prove that such a
mistake was made as would be law entitle him to have the contract reformed.
(f) A orders goods of B by a
letter in which nothing is said as to the time of payment, and excepts the goods on delivery. B sues A for the price. A may
show that the goods were supplied on credit for a term still unexpired.
(g) A sells B a horse and
verbally warrants him sound. A gives B a paper in these words
"Bought of A a horse for Rs.
500". B may prove the verbal warranty.
(h) A hires lodging of B, and
gives a card on which is written "Rooms, Rs. 200
a month". A may prove a verbal agreement that these terms were to include
partial board.
A hires lodgings of B for a
year, and regularly stamped agreement, drawn up by an advocate, is made between
them, it is silent on the subject of board. A may not prove that board was
included in the terms verbally.
(i)
A applies to B for a debt due to A by sending a receipt for the money. B keeps
the receipt and does not send the money. In a such for
the amount A may prove this.
(l) A and B make a contract in writing to
take effect upon the
happening o a certain contingency. The writing is
left with B, who sues A upon it. A may show the circumstances under which t was
delivered.