History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.214

v4.c63.214

Nār. IV. 145, Kāt. (306-307), Saṁvarta (both quoted by Aparārka pp. 691-692) and Bṛ. (S. B. E. 33 p. 309 verse 31) say that no oral evidence should be allowed to contradict the (terms of a) document, that the mode of proving (a matter) by a document is always superior, that a writing can be refuted or superseded only by another document relating to the same matter and not by the oaths of witnesses and that if oral evidence were allowed to overrule the force of documents there would be confusion and an end to all written transactions⁴⁴¹. If there is a conflict among documents then a *jānapada* document (written by a scribe and attested) is superior to one written in the hand of the executant himself and a public document is superior to a jānapada one (Vyāsa q. by Sm. C. II. p. 66, S. V. p. 122).