Section 99 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, (BSA), 2023
Section 99 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) deals with the admissibility of extrinsic evidence to resolve ambiguities in documents when language could apply to one of several persons or things. Essentially, it permits a party to introduce evidence outside the document itself to clarify who or what is being referred to when there is latent ambiguity in the language.
Text of Section 99 BSA (2023)
Section 99 BSA reads as follows:
"When 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."
In simpler terms, this section allows for the introduction of extrinsic evidence to identify which specific person or thing a statement refers to when the language used in a document (or statement) could apply to more than one person or thing. The section ensures that the correct interpretation is given, especially when the written words alone are unclear.
Key Elements of Section 99
To understand how Section 99 functions, it’s important to focus on the criteria for its application:
Ambiguity in Language: The key requirement is that the language used in the document is ambiguous and could apply to multiple subjects (persons or things). This might occur, for example, when a document refers to a person or thing by a name or description that could fit more than one option.
Extrinsic Evidence: The ambiguity must be resolved by external facts or evidence. This could include:
Oral testimony
Other documents (e.g., contracts, communications)
Circumstantial facts
Clarifying the Intention: The goal is not to alter the content or substance of the document but to clarify which person or thing the document was referring to when it was written.
The Language Cannot Apply to More than One: The document should not have been intended to apply to multiple persons or things. It is a latent ambiguity, meaning the ambiguity is not immediately obvious, but arises when trying to apply the document to a particular situation.
Illustrations for Section 99
To clarify the working of Section 99, here are a few hypothetical examples:
Sale of Goods:
A contract says, “I will sell you my car.”
A owns two cars, both of the same make and model.
The language is ambiguous because it’s unclear which car is being referred to.
Section 99 allows evidence of past communications, vehicle registration details, or the condition of the cars to be introduced to show which car A intended to sell.
Property Sale:
A contract mentions, “I will transfer my property in Ramgarh to you.”
There are two properties called “Ramgarh”—one in Rajasthan and the other in Uttar Pradesh.
Section 99 allows evidence, such as prior conversations, maps, or the location of the transaction, to show which Ramgarh was intended.
Will or Testament:
A person’s will states, “I leave my necklace to my daughter.”
The testator has two daughters, both of whom were referred to in similar terms in previous documents.
Section 99 would allow evidence of family relationships or previous bequests to clarify which daughter is intended.
Scope and Limitations of Section 99
Application to Ambiguities: Section 99 is only applicable when there is latent ambiguity—i.e., when the language is capable of more than one meaning, but one meaning is clearly intended. If the language is patently clear or unequivocal, there is no need for external evidence, and Section 99 cannot be invoked.
Extrinsic Evidence: The type of evidence admissible under Section 99 is meant to clarify the intention behind the words used, not to contradict or change the document itself. The external evidence is used solely to resolve the ambiguity but cannot modify the terms of the contract or document.
Limits on Modification: Section 99 does not allow for the introduction of evidence that would alter or rewrite the document’s terms. The goal is not to vary the contract, but to identify the correct referent for the language used.
Precedent and Statutory Limits: While Section 99 provides a basis for admitting extrinsic evidence, it does not allow a complete re-interpretation of the document. The evidence admitted must be consistent with the overall document and must only serve to identify which subject was meant.
Relation to Other Sections of the BSA
Section 99 is a part of a broader framework that deals with the admissibility of evidence in legal proceedings. It works alongside other provisions related to interpretation of documents and admissibility of extrinsic facts. For example:
Section 94 and Section 95 of the BSA deal with situations where documents are clear and unambiguous, restricting the use of oral or extrinsic evidence.
Section 100 of the BSA deals with cases where language might apply to two conflicting sets of facts but does not clearly apply to either. This section permits the court to look at facts to decide which set of facts the language is referring to, in a way similar to Section 99 but with different criteria.
Thus, Section 99 fits into the broader system of allowing courts to interpret documents in a fair and reasonable manner while maintaining the integrity of written contracts and agreements.
Judicial Precedents under the Indian Evidence Act (Relevant for BSA Section 99)
Although direct case law under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023 is still developing, Section 99 shares substantial similarity with provisions in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Courts have dealt with latent ambiguity and the admissibility of extrinsic evidence under the old Evidence Act, and these principles will likely guide decisions under the new BSA.
Latent Ambiguity:
In cases where a document was ambiguous, courts have permitted the introduction of external facts (such as surrounding circumstances or prior conduct) to identify the true meaning of the document. For example, in [S. Ramaswamy v. A. S. Ramaswamy (1976), the Supreme Court held that extrinsic evidence could be used to resolve latent ambiguities, especially when a document could refer to multiple possible subjects.
Extrinsic Evidence:
In [Krishna Murthy v. Narayanaswamy (1979), the Court allowed evidence to determine the correct meaning of the word “my house” in a will, where multiple properties were involved, similar to Section 99's application.
Contractual Ambiguity:
In commercial contract disputes, courts have allowed evidence of the parties' past dealings or conduct to clarify ambiguous terms, such as in [Bank of India v. Rajendra Kumar Jain (2000), where the ambiguity in the contract was resolved through evidence of prior negotiations and actions.
Practical Implications of Section 99
Section 99 plays a significant role in ensuring fairness in interpreting documents. It allows for the correction of mistakes that may arise from ambiguous language, ensuring that the true intent of the parties is honored. This is particularly relevant in:
Property Transactions: Where terms like “my house” or “my land” could apply to more than one property.
Commercial Contracts: Where multiple similar items (e.g., goods, vehicles) are referred to in imprecise terms.
Wills and Testaments: Where the description of heirs or property might be unclear.
Conclusion
Section 99 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 is a vital tool for clarifying ambiguities in written documents, allowing for the introduction of extrinsic evidence to identify the correct referent when the language of a document could apply to more than one person or thing. It ensures fairness and accuracy in legal interpretations, especially in contractual and property disputes.
Since this provision mirrors the principles found in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, courts’ past interpretations under the old Act will likely influence how Section 99 is applied in the future. As legal proceedings evolve under the new BSA, Section 99 will remain a key tool for resolving ambiguities and preserving the integrity of written agreements.
RELATED Blog
comments