Vidhara

The Indian Succession Act, 1925

§80Extrinsic evidence admissible in cases of patent ambiguity

Where the words of a will are unambiguous, but it is found by extrinsic evidence that they admit of applications, one only of which can have been intended by the testator, extrinsic evidence may be taken to show which of these applications was intended. Illustrations (i) A man, having two cousins of the name of Mary, bequeaths a sum of money to "my cousin Mary". It appears that there are two persons, each answering the description in the will. That description, therefore, admits of two applications, only one of which can have been intended by the testator. Evidence is admissible to show which of the two applications was intended. (ii) A, by his will, leaves to B "my estate called Sultanpur Khurd". It turns out that he had two estates called Sultanpur Khurd. Evidence is admissible to show which estate was intended.

Share:WhatsAppTelegram

Source & version

Official text: India Code (official)

Official India Code text: The Indian Succession Act, 1925, English PDF (bitstream 123456789/19051/1/indian_succession_act_1925.pdf, 694,325 bytes, sha256 07fb374ab81026e8...) fetched directly from indiacode.nic.in (Akamai edge, DNS via dns.google) on 2026-08-03. This PDF brackets its footnotes with drawn rules and renders superscript markers inline ("1*50. General principles…"), both of which are handled at ingest (D-062). Section 52 is absent because this edition does not print it — its own footnote records sections 50 to 56 being substituted by Act 17 of 1939. Extracted via pdftotext 26.07 -bbox and the @nexlex/ingest inline parser. Automated parse; footnotes and amendment history excluded. Spot-verified against the PDF; full clause-level proofread pending.

How we verify this text →

Spotted a mistake in this text or its mapping? Report an issue with ISA §80

Was this page useful for your prep?

Feedback