Skip to content

CA Foundation · Business Laws · The Indian Contract Act, 1872

Kiran, an elderly and ailing man, depends entirely on his nephew Lalit for medical care and daily needs. Lalit uses this position to get Kiran to gift him a house, and the gift is unreasonably one-sided. Who has to prove that no undue influence was used?

Lalit must prove that no undue influence was used. He is in a position to dominate Kiran's will because Kiran depends on him for care, and the gift looks unconscionable. In such cases the burden of proof shifts to the dominant party.

  1. AKiran, as the person alleging undue influence
  2. BLalit, because he is in a position to dominate Kiran's will and the transaction appears unconscionableCorrect
  3. CThe court must prove it on its own
  4. DNeither party, as gifts are exempt from this rule

Explanation

Where a person is in a position to dominate another's will and the transaction appears unconscionable on its face, the burden of proving that no undue influence was used lies on the dominant party. Here Lalit holds a dominant position over the dependent Kiran. Option A reverses the burden, which is wrong.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on The Indian Contract Act, 1872 shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise The Indian Contract Act, 1872Free diagnostic mock

More The Indian Contract Act, 1872 questions