the depositions of witnesses there are always some normal discrepancies however honest and truthful they may be. These discrepancies are due to normal errors of observation, normal errors of memory due to lapse of time, due to mental disposition such as shock and horror at the time of the occurrence, and the like. Material discrepancies are those which are not normal, and not expected of a normal person. 

2) While normal discrepancies do not corrode the credibility of a party’s case, material discrepancies do so

Without citing witness evidence I can't find the discrepancies. You need to present the evidence for the same

1. Normal discrepancies in evidence are those which are due to normal errors of observation, normal errors of memory due to lapse of time, due to mental disposition such as shock and horror at the time of occurrence and those are always there however honest and truthful a witness may be. Material discrepancies are those which are not normal, and not expected of a normal person. Courts have to label the category to which a discrepancy may be categorized. While normal discrepancies do not corrode the credibility of a party’s case, material discrepancies do so.

2. Supreme court judgment in 

State of Uttarakhand v. Jarnail Singh

Date of Judgment: November 13, 2017    may clear your doubts in this regard.

Please note that the criminal case judgments also can be quoted if it is relevant tothe case in hand.

1. Law is no science that a set formula can be given to show material discrepancy to be differed with normal discrepancy.

2. Every case has its unique facts situation and hence the discrepancy would vary in each case.

3. Unless and until the evidence and pleadings are scanned no roper advice can be given on this account.  

Registered release deed, presumption of it`s validity. Witness testimony has less credence, weakness of witness won`t win case.

1. Material discripencies are those which is clearly mentioned in the documents and normal discripencies are those which is just small contradiction in the evidence.

You have been explained about the meaning and legal position on the difference between two types of discrepancies, if you do not understand them then you may approach your lawyer to explain and clarify your further doubts.

He will provide umpteen number of samples for the said difference instead of just 5 samples

SC has held s. In the depositions of witnesses there are always some normal discrepancies however honest and truthful they may be. These discrepancies are due to normal errors of observation, normal errors of memory due to lapse of time, due to mental disposition such as shock and horror at the time of the occurrence, and the like. Material discrepancies are those which are not normal, and not expected of a normal person.

2) The Courts have time and again in this context reiterated that overmuch importance cannot be attached to minor discrepancies[and discrepancies, contradictions in narrations and embellishments in inessential parts cannot militate against the veracity of the core of the testimony provided there is the impress of truth and conformity to probability in the substantial fabric of testimony delivered[2

This is expected none can dispose exactly of 23 years old incident. minor discrepancy is avoidable.

Such general discrepancies can't be given in case of evidence. Every evidence is different from others on case to case basis