In some cases the real meaning of the document is not clear without the aid of some extraneous facts (evidence from outside) to the deed. Therefore, chapter VI of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, from sections 93 to 98, lays down the rules for interpreting such documents.

Basically, it deals with the concept of an ambiguous document and its interpretation.

What Is Patent Ambiguity?

Patent ambiguity refers to the ambiguity or an uncertain meaning on the face of the document/agreement/contract. In such ambiguity, the testator’s intention on the face remains unclear. It is also known as intrinsic ambiguity.

Simply , patent ambiguity is where the language of the deed is uncertain and nobody can be certain as to what the language exactly means.

Patent ambiguity is based on the Latin maxim Prima Facie, which means something that appears on the face of the record. That means the meaning of the agreement on the face is unclear or not understandable.

For Example

Rehan agrees, in writing, to sell his land to Piyush for rupees 200000 or 300000. Here, the evidence cannot be given to show which price was to be given because the document on the face is ambiguous.

Section – 93. Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous document

When the language used in a document is, on its face, ambiguous or defective, evidence may not be given of facts which would show its meaning or supply its defects.

Illustrations

(a) A agrees, in writing, to sell a horse to B for “Rs. 1,000 or Rs. 1,500”.
Evidence cannot be given to show which price was to be given.

(b) A deed contains blanks. Evidence cannot be given of facts which would show how they were meant to be filled.

Section – 94. Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts

When language used in a document is plain in itself, and when it applies accurately to existing facts, evidence may not be given to show that it was not meant to apply to such facts.

Illustrations
A sells to B, by deed, “my estate at Rampur containing 100 bighas”. A has an estate at Rampur containing 100 bighas. Evidence may not be given of the fact that the estate meant to be sold was one situated at a different place and of a different size.

Case Laws Related to Patent Ambiguity

Keshavlal Lallubhai Patel vs Lalbhai Trikumlal Mills Ltd (1958): The Supreme Court of India held that it wouldn’t be open for the parties or the court to remove the vagueness or uncertainty by relying upon extraneous evidence because it means making of a new contract between the parties

What Is Latent Ambiguity?

Latent ambiguity refers to the ambiguity that, on the face, appears to be certain and meaningful, but on execution, it does not make any relevanceto the existing facts or the present circumstances. Or simply, it is not apparent on the face of the record.

For Example – A sells to B, by deed, “my house in Ranchi”. The existing fact is that A has no house in Ranchi, but it appears that he had a house at Patna, of which B had been in possession since the execution of the deed. All these facts may be proved to show that the deed was related to the house at Patna

Section – 95. Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts

When language use in a documents is plain it itself, but is unmeaning in reference to existing facts, evidence may be given to show that it was in a peculiar sense.

Illustrations

A sells to B, by deed, “my house in Calcutta”

A had no house in Calcutta, but it appears that he had a house at Howrah, 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 Howrah.

Section – 96. 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 its 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 Haidarabad. Evidence may be given of facts showing whether Haidarabad in the Deckhand or Haidarabad in Sindh was meant.

Section – 97. 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.

Illustration

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.

Section – 98. Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc.

Evidence may be given to show the meaning of illegible or not commonly intelligible characters, of foreign, obsolete, technical, local and provincial expressions, of abbreviations and of words used in a peculiar sense.

Illustration

A, a sculptor, agrees to sell to B, “all my mods” A has both models and modeling tools. Evidence may be given to show which he meant to sell.

Section – 99. Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document

Persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document.

Illustration

A and B make a contract in writing that B shall sell A certain cotton, to be paid for on delivery. At the same time they make an oral agreement that three months’ credit shall be given to A. This could not be shown as between A and B, but it might be shown by C, if it affected his interests.

Section – 100. Saving of provisions of Indian Succession Act, relating to wills

Nothing in this Chapter contained shall be taken to affect any of the provisions of the Indian Succession Act77(10 of 1865) as to the construction of wills.