Sections 99 and 100 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Agreements Varying Documents and Construction of Wills
Sections 99 and 100 formed the closing provisions of Chapter VI of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, dealing with the exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence. This article explains the legal position immediately before the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024.
Section 99 - Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document
Statutory rule
Persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence of facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document.
Section 99 created an important distinction between the parties to a document and persons who are strangers to it. A person who was not a party to the document, and who was not claiming as a representative in interest of a party, could rely on evidence of a contemporaneous agreement that varied the written terms when that agreement affected the person's interests.
Meaning and effect of Section 99
The expression contemporaneous agreement refers to an agreement made at or about the same time as the written document. The section permitted a non-party to prove facts showing such an agreement even though the written document stated different terms. The rule must be read in the context of Sections 91 and 92, which regulated proof of the terms of written transactions and the extent to which oral agreements could be used to contradict, vary, add to or subtract from those terms.
Illustration under Section 99
A and B make a written contract under which B is to sell cotton to A, with payment on delivery. At the same time, they orally agree that A will receive three months' credit. As between A and B, that oral arrangement could not be proved merely to vary the written term; however, C could prove it if the arrangement affected C's interests.
Section 100 - Saving of provisions of Indian Succession Act relating to wills
Statutory rule
Section 100 provided that nothing in Chapter VI of the Indian Evidence Act was to affect the provisions of the succession law governing the construction of wills.
The provision was a saving clause. In other words, the documentary-evidence rules in Chapter VI of the Evidence Act were not intended to displace the special statutory rules governing how wills are interpreted or construed.
The text of the 1872 Act referred to the Indian Succession Act, 1865. For the legal position immediately before 1 July 2024, the operative succession statute was the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The traditional statutory note to Section 100 accordingly directed readers to Part VI, Chapter VI of the 1925 Act.
Connection with the Indian Succession Act, 1925
Part VI of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 concerns testamentary succession. Chapter VI contains rules on the construction of wills. Section 100 of the Evidence Act therefore preserved those special rules rather than allowing the general provisions in Chapter VI of the Evidence Act to override them.
This distinction matters because interpretation of a will may depend on statutory rules specifically designed for testamentary documents. Section 100 made clear that those rules continued to operate independently of the Evidence Act provisions governing documentary and oral evidence.
Summary of Sections 99 and 100
Section 99 allowed a person who was not a party to a document, or a representative in interest of a party, to prove facts showing a contemporaneous agreement varying the document where relevant to that person's interests. Section 100 preserved the special succession-law rules for construing wills. Together, these provisions marked important limits to the general documentary-evidence rules contained in Chapter VI of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Note: This article deliberately states the pre-1 July 2024 legal position under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. For proceedings governed by later law, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 should be consulted separately.