Section 96 IEA: Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons
Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 96 IEA at a Glance
Section 96 IEA deals with evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons. From 1 July 2024 it is replaced by Section 99 BSA.
Section 96 IEA Bare Act Text
96. Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons
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.
Illustrations(a) A agrees to sell to B, for Rs. 1,000, “my white horse”. A has two white horses. Evidence may be give of facts which show which of them was meant.
(b) A agrees to accompany B to Haidarabad. Evidence may be given of facts showing whether Haidarabad in the Dekkhan or Haiderabad in Sind was meant.
Source: Section 96, Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 96 IEA in Simple Words
Section 96 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 let a party give evidence to identify who or what a description referred to. It applied when language could fit any single one of several people or things, yet could not apply to more than one.
Sometimes the words used matched two or more existing people, places or objects, even though only one was meant. In that situation, the Act allowed evidence of facts to prove which specific person or thing was intended.
The Act gave two illustrations of the rule. In one illustration, a seller agreed to sell a white horse for Rs. 1,000 while owning two white horses. A party could prove facts showing which horse the seller meant. In the other, someone agreed to accompany another person to Haidarabad. Evidence could show whether the place meant was Haidarabad located in the Dekkhan or instead Haiderabad located in Sind.
When Section 96 IEA Applies
- The language used could have been meant to refer to any single one among several people or things.
- The language could not have been meant to refer to more than one of those people or things.
- A party could give evidence of facts showing which specific person or thing the language was meant to cover.
Example of Section 96 IEA
Section 96 IEA in the BSA
Section 96 IEA is now covered under Section 99 BSA.
Section 96 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 became Section 99 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 on 1 July 2024. No substantive change. In the illustrations, places were updated and the sum is written in words.
View detailed comparison (IEA 96 vs BSA 99) →FAQs on Section 96 IEA
What is Section 96 IEA?▼
Section 96 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was a rule for situations where language could apply to any one of several people or things, yet not to more than one. It allowed a party to give evidence of facts showing which person or thing was meant.
Could evidence be given under Section 96 IEA if a seller agreed to sell a white horse while owning two white horses?▼
Yes. As shown in the illustration to Section 96 IEA, when a seller with two white horses agreed to sell one white horse for Rs. 1,000, a party could give evidence of facts showing which horse was meant.
Could Section 96 IEA be used when two places shared the same name?▼
Yes. In the illustration to Section 96 IEA about an agreement to travel to Haidarabad, evidence of facts could show whether the place meant was Haidarabad located in the Dekkhan or instead Haiderabad located in Sind.
What is Section 96 IEA in BSA?▼
Section 99 BSA. Section 96 IEA became Section 99 BSA on 1 July 2024 without any substantive change. In the illustrations, the places were updated and the sum is written in words.
Have questions about Section 96 IEA?
Ask NyayGuru for a plain language explanation, or how it applies to your situation.
Ask NyayGuru →Disclaimer: This is for informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.
Sources: Bare Act Text, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ·