Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 — Section 105: Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts

105. Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts.— When language used in a document is plain in itself, but is unmeaning in reference to existing facts, evidence may be given to show that it was used in a peculiar sense. Illustrations A sells to B, by deed, “my house in Karachi”. A had no house in Karachi, but it appears that he had a house at Keamari, of which B had been in possession since the execution of the deed. These facts may be proved to show that the deed related to the house at Keamari. 106. 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 given of facts which show which of them was meant.

(b)A agrees to accompany B to Hyderabad. Evidence may be given of facts showing whether Hyderabad in the Dekkhan or Hyderabad in Sind was meant. 107. Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts to neither of which the whole correctly applies.— When the language used applies partly to one set of existing facts, and partly to another set of existing facts, but the whole of it does not apply correctly to either, evidence may be given to show to which of the two it was meant to apply. Illustrations A agrees to sell to B “my land at X in the occupation of Y”. A has land at X, but not in the occupation of Y, and he has land in the occupation of Y, but it is not at X. Evidence may be given of facts showing which he meant to sell.