Skip to content

CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Law relating to Evidence

A contract for supply of goods between Kavita and Dinesh was reduced to writing. The written contract mentions that Dinesh had paid Kavita for an earlier, separate oral order. Can oral evidence be offered that no payment was made for that earlier order?

Yes, oral evidence is allowed. Section 94 excludes oral evidence only about the terms of the written contract. Under its Explanation 3, a statement in the document about some other fact, such as payment for a separate earlier oral order, does not stop oral evidence on that fact.

  1. ANo, because any mention in a written contract bars oral evidence on the same fact
  2. BNo, because oral evidence is never allowed where a document exists
  3. CYes, because the statement in a document of a fact other than the terms of the contract does not preclude oral evidence of that factCorrect
  4. DYes, but only with the permission of the opposite party

Explanation

Section 94 bars oral evidence of the terms of a document-based contract. Explanation 3 provides that a statement in a document of a fact other than those referred to in the section does not preclude oral evidence of that fact. The earlier oral order is not a term of the written contract, so oral evidence is allowed.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Evidence shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Law relating to EvidenceFree diagnostic mock

More Law relating to Evidence questions