"Drafting of documents is very important part of legal documentation. Documents are subject to interpretation when no clear meaning could be inferred by a simple reading of documents." Explain this statement with referen

The process of drafting operates in two planes: the conceptual and the verbal. Besides seeking the right words, the draftsman seeks the right concepts. Drafting, therefore, is first thinking and second composing. A proper understanding of drafting cannot be realized unless the nexus between the law, the facts, and the language is fully understood and accepted. There is no law in India on the interpretation of documents. On the subject of interpretation of statutes Maxwell's works published by Butterworth commands wide acceptance by the judiciary all over India. Based on the said work a set of principles has been evolved for the interpretation and construction of documents, assessing the language and assigning the exact meaning to the words and phrases to be used in the documents. The object of all interpretation of a 'Written Document' is to discover the intention of the author, the written declaration of whose mind the document is always considered to be. Consequently, the construction must be as clear, to the minds and apparent intention of the parties, as possible and as the law will permit. Where the agreement is formal and written, the following rules of the interpretation may be applied: A deed constitutes the primary evidence of the terms of a contract, or of a grant, or of any other disposition of property (Section 91 of the Evidence Act). The law forbids any contradiction of, or any addition, subtraction or variation in a written document by any extrinsic evidence, though such evidence will be admissible to explain any ambiguity (Section 92 of the Evidence Act). The document should, therefore, contain all the terms and conditions, preceded by recital of all relevant and material facts. In cases of uncertainty, the rules embodied in provisos 2 and 6 of Section 92 of the Evidence Act can be invoked for construing a deed. The sixth proviso enables the court to examine the facts and surrounding circumstances to which the language of the document may be related, while the second proviso permits evidence of any separate oral agreement on which the document is silent and which is not inconsistent with its terms. The cardinal rule is that clear and unambiguous words prevail over any hypothetical considerations or supposed intention. But if the words used are not clear and unambiguous the intention will have to be ascertained. In case the terms are not unambiguous it is legitimate to take into account the surrounding circumstances for ascertaining the intention of the parties. The social milieu, the actual life situations and the prevailing conditions of the country are also relevant circumstances. Sometimes a contract is completed in two parts. At first an executory contract is executed and later on an executed contract. In case of any difference between the preliminary contract and final contract, the terms of the latter must prevail. If in a deed an earlier clause is followed by a later clause which destroys altogether the obligation created by the earlier clause, the latter clause is to be rejected as repugnant and the earlier clause prevails. The court must interpret the words in their popular, natural and ordinary sense, subject to certain exceptions as, where the contract affords an interpretation different from the ordinary meaning of the words; or where the conventional meanings are not the same with their legal sense. Hardship to either party is not an element to be considered unless it amounts to a degree of inconvenience or absurdity so great as to afford judicial proof that such could not be the meaning of the parties. All mercantile documents should receive a liberal construction. No clause should be regarded as superfluous, since merchants are not in the habit of inserting stipulations to which they do not attach some value and importance. The construction adopted, should, as far as possible, give a meaning to every word and every part of the document. Construction given to mercantile documents years ago, and accepted in the mercantile world should not be departed from, because documents may have been drafted in the faith thereof. If certain words employed in business, or in a particular locality, have been used in particular sense, they must prima facie be construed in technical sense. The ordinary grammatical interpretation is not to be followed, if it is repugnant to the general context. Antecedent facts or correspondence, or words deleted before the conclusion of the contract cannot be considered relevant to ascertain the meaning. Evidence of acts done under a deed can, in case of doubt as to its true meaning, be a guide to the intention of the parties, particularly when acts are done shortly after the date of the instrument. If the main clause is clear and the contingency mentioned in the proviso does not arise, the proviso is not attracted at all and its language should not be referred to for construing the main clause in a manner contradictory to its import. The fact that a clause in the deed is not binding on the ground that it is unauthorised cannot ipso facto render the whole deed void unless it forms such an integral part of the transaction as to render it impossible to severe the good from the bad.