Skip to content

CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Law relating to Evidence

Kiran and Lata have been openly running a boutique together, sharing profits and dealing with suppliers as partners. In a dispute, Lata argues that she was never a partner. Which statement correctly reflects the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023?

Lata must prove it. Section 112 says that once persons are shown to have acted as partners, the burden of proving that they are not, or have ceased to be, partners lies on the person who affirms it. No written deed is required for this rule.

  1. AKiran must prove that Lata was a partner, as he asserts the relationship
  2. BLata must prove that they do not stand in the relationship of partners, since it is shown that they acted as suchCorrect
  3. CThe burden shifts to the Court because the relationship is a mixed question
  4. DNo burden arises unless a written partnership deed exists

Explanation

Section 112 provides that where persons are shown to have been acting as partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, the burden of proving they do not or no longer stand in that relationship is on the person who affirms it. Lata affirms this, so the burden is hers. The first option ignores that acting as partners has been shown, and the last adds a written deed requirement which the Section does not impose.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Evidence shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Law relating to EvidenceFree diagnostic mock

More Law relating to Evidence questions