50 exam-style questions on this chapter, written from the actual legal text and tagged for UPSC, Judiciary and CLAT. Five are shown below with answers and explanations — the rest are in the free interactive drill.
Q1 · easy · BSA S.100
According to Section 100 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, when may evidence be given?
- A.When the language used applies wholly and correctly to one existing set of facts.
- B.When the language used applies partly to one set of existing facts and partly to another set, but the whole of it does not apply correctly to either.✓ correct
- C.When the parties disagree about the price or consideration stated in an instrument.
- D.When a written document is complete and unambiguous on its face.
Why: Section 100 states evidence may be given when the language applies partly to one set of facts and partly to another, but the whole does not apply correctly to either. The provision does not refer to wholly-applicable language, price disputes, or completed unambiguous documents.
Read Section 100 — Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the →Q2 · easy · BSA S.100
What situation does the illustration accompanying Section 100 exemplify?
- A.A has land at X but no other land; hence the description is inapplicable and evidence is barred.
- B.A has land at X and that same land is in the occupation of Y, so the description fits exactly.
- C.A has land at X but not in the occupation of Y, and also has land in the occupation of Y which is not at X; evidence may be given to show which he meant to sell.✓ correct
- D.The illustration shows that evidence is never admissible to resolve location disputes.
Why: The illustration describes A having land at X not occupied by Y, and land occupied by Y not at X, and states evidence may be given to show which he meant to sell. This directly reflects the text of Section 100.
Read Section 100 — Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the →Q3 · medium · BSA S.100
Which of the following scenarios would fall within Section 100 so that evidence may be given?
- A.A contract describes 'my field at P occupied by Q'; in fact there is a field at P not occupied by Q, and a different field occupied by Q not at P.✓ correct
- B.A description in an instrument exactly matches a single, existing parcel of land with no conflicting facts.
- C.The language in a document applies wholly and correctly to one of multiple possible properties.
- D.There are no existing facts at all matching any part of the language used in the instrument.
Why: Section 100 applies where the language applies partly to one existing set of facts and partly to another (as in option 1). If the language fits wholly one property, or fits none, the provision's condition is not met.
Read Section 100 — Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the →Q4 · medium · BSA S.100
If the language used in an instrument applies wholly and correctly to one set of existing facts, may evidence be given under Section 100?
- A.Yes, evidence may always be given under Section 100 regardless of complete applicability.
- B.Yes, but only with the consent of both parties to the instrument.
- C.Yes, but only if the court finds the language was intended to apply elsewhere.
- D.No, because Section 100 applies only when the whole of the language does not apply correctly to either of the two sets of facts.✓ correct
Why: Section 100 is expressly limited to cases where the whole of the language does not apply correctly to either of two sets of facts. If the language applies wholly and correctly to one set, the stated condition for admitting evidence under Section 100 is not present.
Read Section 100 — Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the →Q5 · hard · BSA S.100
Does Section 100, as worded, permit evidence to determine intended application when the language applies partly to one of several (more than two) existing sets of facts?
- A.Yes — it expressly extends to any number of competing sets of facts.
- B.No — it speaks specifically of one of two sets of existing facts and does not address more than two.✓ correct
- C.Yes — but only when there are exactly three competing sets of facts.
- D.No — it requires the language to be totally inapplicable to all existing facts before evidence can be given.
Why: Section 100 refers to language that applies partly to one set of existing facts and partly to another (i.e., two sets) and permits evidence to show to which of the two it was meant to apply. The provision does not extend that wording to more than two sets.
Read Section 100 — Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the →45 more questions on Of The Exclusion Of Oral Evidence By Documentary Evidence
Drill them interactively — instant feedback, links to every provision, and your accuracy tracked on the syllabus map. Free.
Start the free drill →Questions are AI-generated from the legal text, machine-verified against the provision, and editorially reviewable. Education, not legal advice.