Money borrowing without written document

Many thanks for the information!

If Yogesh comes to the Court and testifies that I borrowed money from him (and I also testify that I borrowed money from Yogesh) then will it be enough to prove that I borrowed money from Yogesh OR will I (or Yogesh) need to do anything else (for example, witnesses)  to prove this money borrowing really took place?

Lending money to friends and family ranks among the most pernicious of relationship stressors.It's possible to help out a friend in a responsible, fiscally sound way, provided that certain measures are in place -- among them, a solid loan agreement.

Thanks for your feedbacks. My problem is:

I am facing a lawsuit from Rupesh. Rupesh is accusing me that I did not borrow money from Yogesh a few years ago (Rupesh is accusing me that I got that money in some other ways but not by borrowing from Yogesh). I need to prove to the court that I borrowed money from Yogesh a few years ago. There is no written agreement/promissory note between me and Yogesh about this money borrowing: it is simply based on word of mouth agreement.

I need to prove to the court what Rupesh is saying is wrong. Therefore, I am going to tell the court  that I borrowed money from Yogesh a few years ago and that there is no written agreement for this. Yogesh is also willing to tell the same in the court  Will it be enough to convince  the court that I borrowed money from Yogesh a few years ago?  That is, will this be enough to convince the court that what Rupesh is telling is wrong? i

You are not coming out with the whole truth. Why should Rupesh be worried whether you borrowed or did not borrow money from Yogesh? What is the locus standii of Rupesh with regard to your dealings with Yogesh?

Please provide an answer if you can rather than trying to dig into the stuff that is unncessary for you.

I am sorry for my rude response, and I apologize.

Recently I lost a case against Rupesh (I lost the case a few months after I paid back my loan money to Yogesh) and the court asked me to pay money to Rupesh. However, I did not have any money now. Now Rupesh comlained to the court to get the judgment money from me. He is planning to argue in the court that I “saved” (or hide) my money with Yogesh. That is why I need to prove to the Court that I did not hide the money with Yogesh but I simply paid back the loan which I borrowed (years ago) from Yogesh.

Yogesh is also ready to testify in the court that he infact lent me noney a few years ago (without any promissory note or so) and that I paid back the loan. He will also testify that I di dnot hide any money with him.

Now let me try to reproduce your narration.

1. You borrowed money from Yogesh. Later you repaid the loan to Yogesh.

2. Earlier or later you had borrowed money from or had otherwise owed money to Rupesh.

3. Rupesh asked you to repay him.  You did not pay back  Rupesh.  He (Rupesh) went to court and got an order against you to pay back his money. You say you have no money to pay back.

   Your fear is that Rupesh will dispute your claim that you do not have money and tell the court that you have with you the money you got from Yogesh,  you are telling a lie and that you should pay to Rupesh the money you got from Yogesh.

   In law there is nothing like that. If court orders that you have to pay Rupesh, you have to pay Rupesh, Yogesh or no Yogesh.  If you do not pay, the court can order recovery of the amount from your assets, which may be immovable property, bank balance or any other. If you do not have any assets you can be sent to jail.

   Your transactions with Yogesh and your transaction with Rupesh are independent,  unless there exists a nexus through any kind of agreement inter-connecting them. Are you hiding any such a nexus?

Thank you and I appreciate.

Specifically, the information you provided: 'Your transactions with Yogesh and your transaction with Rupesh are independent, unless there exists a nexus.." is helpful.

Still I did not get an answer to my fundamental question:  how a person can legally prove that he borrowed money from someone if there is no written agreement? If both the parties (the lender and the borrower) say that the money borrowing took place then will it be enough to legally prove that the borrwing took place?

In so far as the lender and borrower (you and Yogesh) are concerned there is no problem. But if a third party (Rupesh) has any interest in your dealings with Yogesh, he can say that whatever written evidence from Yogesh, which you now produce  are cooked up evidene and court will accept the stand of Rupesh. You have still not disclosed what is the interest of Rupesh in your dealings with Yogesh. Rupesh can claim that you are colluding with Yogesh now.

Thank you and I appreciate.

I have no plans to cook documents now. I will tell the truth (saying that the loan between me and Yogesh is word of mouth agreement) to the court. Let Rupesh prove what I am saying is false. if necessary, I will bring witnesses who confirms that I did infact borrowed money from Yogesh in the past.