Section 14 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023: Existence of Course of Business When Relevant

Understand Section 14 BSA, 2023, with its meaning, statutory illustrations, examples, case law and exam-focused notes.

Introduction

Section 14 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) explains when the existence of a regular course of business becomes relevant in determining whether a particular act was performed. It falls under Chapter II, which deals with the relevancy of facts.

In civil and commercial disputes, it is not always possible to prove every routine act through direct evidence. For instance, a person may dispute receiving a legal notice, while the sender claims that it was properly dispatched. In such a situation, evidence of the sender’s established dispatch procedure and the handling of the particular letter may help the court determine whether the notice was sent.

Section 14 recognises that an established course of business can provide relevant evidence about whether a particular act occurred. Its statutory illustrations specifically concern the dispatch and receipt of letters.

The provision substantially corresponds to Section 16 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam came into force on 1 July 2024.

Bare Act: Section 14 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Section 14 provides:

“When there is a question whether a particular act was done, the existence of any course of business, according to which it naturally would have been done, is a relevant fact.”

The section contains two illustrations:

Illustration (a): The question is whether a particular letter was dispatched. The facts that it was the ordinary course of business for all letters put in a certain place to be carried to the post, and that the particular letter was put in that place, are relevant.

Illustration (b): The question is whether a particular letter reached A. The facts that it was posted in due course, and was not returned through the Return Letter Office, are relevant.

These illustrations demonstrate how evidence of a regular procedure may help establish whether a particular act was performed.

Meaning of Section 14 BSA

In simple terms, Section 14 means that when a court must decide whether a particular act took place, evidence of the regular procedure followed in similar situations may be relevant.

A course of business refers to an established and recurring practice followed in the ordinary conduct of business or routine activities.

For example, a company may follow a regular procedure for dispatching notices: the notice is prepared, entered into a dispatch register, placed in an outgoing-mail tray and handed over to the postal service. If a dispute arises about whether a particular notice was dispatched, evidence of this procedure and the handling of that notice may help the court assess the claim.

However, the existence of a routine procedure does not automatically prove that it was followed in every individual case. The court must consider whether the disputed act was connected to the established procedure and whether other evidence supports or contradicts the claim.

Essential Elements of Section 14 BSA

1. A particular act must be in question

Section 14 applies when the parties dispute whether a specific act was performed.

Examples include whether a letter was dispatched, whether a notice was sent, or whether a routine business transaction was completed.

2. An established course of business must exist

There must be evidence of a regular procedure according to which the disputed act would naturally have been performed.

This may be demonstrated through dispatch registers, standard operating procedures, transaction records, employee testimony or other reliable evidence.

3. The disputed act must be connected with the procedure

It is not sufficient to establish that an organisation generally follows a particular practice. There must also be relevant evidence connecting the disputed act with that practice.

Also Read: Section 13 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023: Facts Bearing on Whether an Act Was Accidental or Intentional

For example, evidence that a company ordinarily posts every notice is more useful when the particular notice is also recorded in its dispatch register or shown to have been placed in the outgoing-mail tray.

4. The procedure must assist in determining whether the act occurred

The established course of business must help the court assess whether the particular act was performed.

The strength of the inference depends on the reliability of the procedure, the evidence connecting the act to it and the surrounding circumstances.

5. The inference is not automatically conclusive

Section 14 makes the existence of a course of business a relevant fact. It does not declare that every act must be presumed to have occurred simply because it would ordinarily have been performed in that way.

The court must evaluate the available evidence and determine the appropriate inference.

Illustrations of Section 14 BSA

Illustration 1: Whether a Letter Was Dispatched

A disputes that B sent a particular letter. B establishes that all outgoing letters placed in a designated tray are ordinarily collected and taken to the post office. Evidence shows that the disputed letter was placed in that tray.

The established procedure and the placement of the letter are relevant under Section 14.

Legal principle: A regular course of business, combined with evidence connecting the particular letter to that procedure, may help establish that the letter was dispatched.

Illustration 2: Whether a Letter Reached the Addressee

A claims that a letter never reached them. B establishes that the letter was posted in the ordinary course and was not returned through the postal service’s Return Letter Office.

These facts are relevant to whether the letter reached A.

However, the absence of a returned letter does not conclusively prove actual delivery. The court must consider the circumstances and any evidence contradicting the inference.

Illustration 3: Dispatch of a Legal Notice

A company claims that it sent a legal notice to a customer. It produces its dispatch register, evidence of its ordinary mailing procedure and records connecting the particular notice to that procedure.

These facts may help establish that the notice was dispatched.

If the customer produces evidence that the address was incorrect or that the dispatch entry was unreliable, the court must consider that evidence before reaching a conclusion.

Illustration 4: Processing of a Business Payment

A business follows a regular process under which approved invoices are entered into its accounting system and payments are issued after authorisation.

A dispute arises over whether a particular payment was processed. Evidence of the established procedure, the approval record and the transaction history may help the court determine whether the payment occurred.

The business’s usual practice alone would not establish that the particular payment was made if the transaction records or other evidence contradict that conclusion.

Important Case Law Relating to Section 14 BSA

Section 14 substantially corresponds to Section 16 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Earlier decisions interpreting Section 16 and the related principle concerning postal communications remain useful in understanding the provision.

Harihar Banerji v. Ramshashi Roy

Citation: AIR 1918 PC 102

Court: Privy Council

Also Read: Section 11 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023: Facts Relevant When Right or Custom Is in Question

Legal principle: The Privy Council considered the evidentiary inference arising from a letter that was properly addressed and posted. It recognised that, when the necessary circumstances are established, the ordinary course of postal business may support an inference that the letter reached its destination in the usual course.

Relevance to Section 14 BSA: The case illustrates how evidence of an established course of business may assist a court in determining whether correspondence was received. It is particularly relevant to disputes involving notices sent by post.

The inference is not necessarily conclusive. The court must consider the circumstances of the particular case and any evidence that may rebut the inference. The decision is associated with the broader postal-rule principle and should not be treated as establishing an irrebuttable presumption under Section 14 alone.

Relationship Between Section 14 and Section 119 of the BSA

Section 14 and Section 119 are related, but they perform different functions.

Section 14 makes the existence of a course of business relevant when determining whether a particular act was performed.

Section 119 permits a court to presume the existence of certain facts in appropriate circumstances, having regard to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business in their relation to the facts of the particular case. One of its illustrations concerns the presumption that the common course of business has been followed in particular cases.

For example, evidence that an organisation follows a regular procedure for dispatching letters may be relevant under Section 14. Depending on the circumstances, the court may also consider whether an inference can be drawn under Section 119.

Key distinction: Section 14 concerns relevancy; Section 119 concerns the court’s power to presume certain facts. The two provisions should not be treated as interchangeable.

Difference Between Section 13 and Section 14 of the BSA

Basis	Section 13 BSA	Section 14 BSA
Subject	Facts bearing on whether an act was accidental or intentional	Existence of a course of business
Main focus	A series of similar occurrences	An established routine or business procedure
Example	Repeated similar incidents relevant to intention	A regular postal procedure relevant to whether a letter was sent
Corresponding provision under the old law	Section 15, Indian Evidence Act, 1872	Section 16, Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 13 concerns similar occurrences that help determine the nature or intention behind an act. Section 14 concerns an established course of business that helps determine whether a particular act was performed.

Importance of Section 14 for Law Students

Section 14 is important for examinations and practical litigation because it explains how evidence of routine procedures can assist in proving disputed acts.

The key points to remember are:

• Section 14 BSA corresponds substantially to Section 16 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
• It applies when the performance of a particular act is disputed.
• An established course of business may be relevant if the act would naturally have been performed according to that procedure.
• The statutory illustrations concern the dispatch and receipt of letters.
• Evidence connecting the disputed act with the usual procedure strengthens the inference.
• The existence of a routine does not conclusively establish that the particular act occurred.
• Section 119 BSA separately addresses circumstances in which the court may presume certain facts.
• The principle is useful in disputes involving correspondence, legal notices, business records and routine administrative procedures.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is Section 14 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023?

Section 14 provides that when there is a question whether a particular act was performed, the existence of a course of business according to which it would naturally have been performed is a relevant fact.

2. Which section of the Indian Evidence Act corresponds to Section 14 BSA?

Section 14 of the BSA substantially corresponds to Section 16 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

3. What does course of business mean?

It means an established and regular procedure followed in conducting business or performing routine activities.

4. What are the illustrations under Section 14 BSA?

The illustrations concern whether a letter was dispatched and whether it reached its addressee. They show how evidence of regular postal procedures may assist the court in deciding those questions.

5. Does Section 14 automatically prove that a letter was delivered?

No. It makes evidence of the relevant course of business relevant. The court must consider the particular circumstances and any evidence contradicting the inference.

6. What is the difference between Section 14 and Section 119 BSA?

Section 14 identifies the relevancy of an established course of business. Section 119 deals with circumstances in which a court may presume certain facts. They are related but distinct provisions.

7. Is Section 14 relevant only to postal letters?

No. Although its statutory illustrations concern letters, the principle can apply to other established business or administrative procedures when the performance of a particular act is disputed.

Conclusion

Section 14 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 recognises that an established course of business can help a court determine whether a particular act was performed. Its statutory illustrations explain how regular postal procedures may be relevant when the dispatch or receipt of a letter is disputed.

The provision is useful in disputes concerning correspondence, legal notices, business transactions and routine administrative processes. However, evidence of a regular procedure does not conclusively prove that the procedure was followed in every individual case. The court must consider the connection between the usual practice and the disputed act, along with any contrary evidence.

For examinations, remember the statutory wording, both illustrations, the corresponding Section 16 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the distinction between relevancy under Section 14 and presumptions under Section 119 of the BSA.