Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Chapter VI: Of the Exclusion of Oral by Documentary Evidence
Section 97: Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the whole correctly applies
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
When language applies partly to one set of facts and partly to another, but wholly to neither, evidence can be given to show which was intended.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
When the language used applies partly to one set of existing facts, and partly to another set of existing facts, but the whole of it does not apply correctly to either, evidence may be given to show to which of the two it was meant to apply.
Illustration A agrees to sell to B “my land at X in the occupation of Y”. A has land at X, but not in the occupation of Y, and he has land in the occupation of Y but it is not at X. Evidence may be given of facts showing which he meant to sell.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.