§ SECTION 102 · BSA 2023 · CHAPTER VI — EXCLUSION OF ORAL BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document

The oral-evidence bar of §§ 94–95 binds only the parties. A person who is not a party — or his representative in interest — may give evidence of a contemporaneous agreement varying the document’s terms, where it affects him.

How to read Section 102

Not a party to the writing → may prove a contemporaneous agreement varying it.

The trigger

The witness is not a party to the document (or is a representative in interest), and a contemporaneous agreement varies its terms.

The opening

Such a person may give evidence of any facts showing that varying agreement.

The limit

The parties themselves stay barred (§§ 94–95); the agreement must be contemporaneous and affect the non-party.

The bare Act

The section in its own words — the rule and its illustration.

Section 102 · verbatim

Persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document.

Illustration

A and B make a contract in writing that B shall sell A certain cotton, to be paid for on delivery. At the same time, they make an oral agreement that three months’ credit shall be given to A. This could not be shown as between A and B, but it might be shown by C, if it affected his interests.

In short: §§ 94–95 shut out oral evidence that would vary a written contract — but that shutter falls only on the parties and those who stand in their shoes. A stranger to the document is not bound by their bargain, so where a contemporaneous side-agreement changes the terms and his own interests turn on it, he may prove it. The written cotton contract says ‘paid on delivery’; A and B cannot add their oral ‘three months’ credit’ against each other — but C, whose interests it affects, can.

→ This carries forward IEA 1872 § 99 — strangers to a document are not bound by the oral-evidence bar.

Glossary

persons who are not parties

Strangers to the document — those who did not make it and are not bound by it.

representatives in interest

Those who stand in another’s legal shoes — heirs, assignees and the like.

contemporaneous agreement

A separate agreement made at the same time as the document.

varying the terms

Changing or qualifying what the writing says.

as between A and B

Between the parties themselves — where the §§ 94–95 bar applies.

if it affected his interests

The non-party may prove it where it touches his own rights.

The picture

The bar falls on the parties — a stranger whose interests are affected may still prove the side-agreement.

The section, part by part

Tap a part — the picture-story tells it first; the word-by-word text and example follow.

The ruleParties vs strangers

the ruleA non-party may prove a contemporaneous agreement varying the writing

In one lineA person who is not a party to a document (or his representative in interest) may give evidence of any facts showing a contemporaneous agreement that varies its terms.

Persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest,who: a stranger to the writing (or his representative)someone not bound by the document — a non-party, or one who stands in a non-party’s shoes…

may give evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document.→ may prove a contemporaneous varying agreement…may give evidence of a side-agreement, made at the same time, that changes the terms.

ExampleC, an assignee who was no party to a sale deed, may prove a contemporaneous oral term about the price where his own claim turns on it — though the seller and buyer could not.

✗ Not thisThe parties themselves (A and B) stay barred by §§ 94–95 from varying their writing by oral evidence. This door opens only for a non-party (or his representative in interest) whose interests are affected.

parties vs strangersThe same oral term: barred between A & B · provable by C

In one lineThe written cotton contract says ‘paid on delivery’. The oral three months’ credit cannot be shown between A and B — but C may show it, if it affects his interests.

A and B make a contract in writing that B shall sell A certain cotton, to be paid for on delivery. At the same time, they make an oral agreement that three months’ credit shall be given to A.a written term + a contemporaneous oral variationthe writing says paid on delivery; a side oral term gives A three months’ credit.

This could not be shown as between A and B, but it might be shown by C, if it affected his interests.→ barred between A & B · provable by CA and B cannot prove the credit term against each other; C, a stranger, can, where it affects him.

ExampleSuppose C’s money is due only once A pays B. Whether A owed on delivery or after three months’ credit changes when C is paid — so C may prove the credit term, though A and B cannot.

✗ Not thisC proves the term only because he is a stranger whose interests are affected — not to help A escape his own writing. Between A and B the credit term stays out.

Connected provisions

§ 94

IEA 1872, § 99

Carried forward — strangers are not bound by the oral-evidence bar.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — Section 102: Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document