Latent ambiguity vs Patent ambiguity

Dear client,

A patent ambiguity is apparent on the face of the document itself (e.g., leaving a blank space for a name, or contradicting terms within the text). Here, on the face of the agreement, the text reads clearly and makes sense (“Rakesh living at 8th ABC Road”). However, the ambiguity becomes hidden or latent only when you attempt to apply the text to external, physical reality—for instance, if there are multiple individuals named "Rakesh" residing in that same building or on that street, or if the lack of a flat number prevents pointing to one specific person.
The description appears sufficient until applied to reality.

Section 29 states that agreements, the meaning of which is not certain, or capable of being made certain, are void.
The crucial phrase is "capable of being made certain". Merely omitting secondary identifiers like PAN or Aadhaar does not automatically render an agreement void for uncertainty under Section 29, provided the description given (Rakesh + 8th ABC Road, Kolkata-17) is capable of being linked to a unique, ascertainable individual through extrinsic facts. If "Rakesh" can be pinpointed with reasonable certainty from the context or surrounding facts, the contract survives.B.
Sections 92 to 98 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872,Section 92: Prohibits the admission of parol (oral) evidence to contradict, vary, add to, or subtract from the terms of a valid written contract.
However, this is subject to provisos.
Section 95 (Latent Ambiguity as to Application): States that when language used in a document is plain in itself, but is unmeaning in reference to existing facts, evidence may be given to show that it was used in a peculiar sense.
Section 96 (When Language Applies to One of Several Mismatching Facts): States that when the facts are such that the language might apply to any one, and to only one, of several persons, or things, evidence may be given of facts which show which of those persons or things the parties intended to use.
Section 98: Allows evidence to be given to show the meaning of illegible or unintelligible characters, foreign words, local expressions, etc.

Will an Affidavit Clarification or Witness Testimony Help?
Witness Testimony (Oral Evidence under Sec. 95/96):
Yes. Because this is a latent ambiguity, extrinsic evidence, including the testimony of attesting witnesses who were present during execution, or circumstantial evidence showing who signed, who negotiated, and who occupies which unit at 8th ABC Road—is fully admissible under the Indian Evidence Act to identify which "Rakesh" was intended.

A post-execution standalone affidavit by one party or a third-party witness alone carries weaker evidentiary value if disputed, but an affidavit filed in court as pleadings/evidence supported by contemporaneous execution logs, emails, ID proofs presented at signing, or the testimony of the drafting lawyer/witnesses will successfully bridge the identification gap.