100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 28 - 30 out of 51 pages.
two date turned out to be different, it was held that evidence could be offered to show whichdate was meant.Section 97 deals with the Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts toneither of which the whole correctly applies. The principle of the section is that where thelanguage of a document applies to one set of facts and partly to another, but does not applyaccurately to either, evidence can be given to show to which facts the document was meant toapply.Section 98 deals with the Evidence as to meaning of illegible character, etc. This section permitsevidence to be given of the meaning of words or marks of illegible character or words which arenot commonly of intelligible character, foreign words, obsolete words, technical, local andprovincial expressions, abbreviations words used in a peculiar sense. In Canadian-GeneralElectric W. v. Fatda Radio Ltdit was held that Oral evidence is admissible for the purpose ofexplaining artistic words and symbols used in a document.Section 99 deals with who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document. Theparties to a document or their representative-in-interest cannot give evidence of acontemporary agreement varying the terms of the document.
LAW OF EVIDENCE CONCLUSIONDocument evidence has more value than the oral evidence. Court is bound to accept thedocumentary evidence. But oral evidence may take in consideration. It also need to somecorroboration. In brief it is submitted that two types of evidence are given by the parties oraland documentary evidence. In courts the value of oral evidence is less than documentaryevidence. Because the law always requires the best evidence oral evidence is a evidence is aevidence which is confined to the words spoken by the mouth. On another sidedocumentary evidence are of two types. Primary evidence is more reliable and best evidenceconsider by court. In the absence of primary evidence, secondary evidence is that which thewitnesses are giving on the basis of his own perception. Whereas primary evidence is theoriginal document which is presented to the court for its inspection. Direct evidence is best oralevidence of fact to be proved. But primary evidence is the best evidence in all circumstances.There is also exclusion of oral evidence by document evidence document also of two kindsambiguous and non ambiguous. The person giving direct evidence available for crossexamination for testing its veracity.Hence, as it is considered that document is written to perpetuate the memory, Sections 91 and92 exclude oral evidence by documentary evidence. Oral proof cannot be substituted in theplace of written documents where the written document exists in proof of certain transactionsreferred to in Section 91 as written testimony is of higher grade, more certain and more reliablethan oral evidence.