Falsa demonstratio non nocet cum de corpore constat:
Mere false description does not vitiate, if there be sufficient certainty as to the object.
When the language of a document is plain but is unmeaning in reference to existing facts, evidence is admissible to show that language is used with reference to the notorious facts. [Ramlakhan Pandey v. Digbijoy Narain Singh, 1948 P 274]. When a description in a document is partly correct and partly incorrect, and the former part is sufficient to identify the subject-matter intended while the latter does not apply to any subject, the erroneous part will be rejected on the maxim that a false description will not hurt when it can exist with the subject itself. [Narain Das v. Tek Chand, 84 IC 137]. If, after rejecting so much of the description as is false, the reminder will enable the Court to ascertain with legal certainty the subject-matter to which the instrument really applies, it will be, allowed to take effect.
