bonafide purchaser

Ashu (Querist) 27 September 2009 This query is : Resolved
if bonafide purchaser denied the previous agreement, then the onus to prove the previous agreement exist goes on the plaintiff or the bonafide purchaser.......if on plaintiff, then please submit any case law

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 27 September 2009
This is the established law that whosoever asserts must prove so it is the onus of bonafide purchaser to establish that no agreement existed prior to his purchase and on the other hand it is upon the plaintiff to rebut the same through convincing evidence (agreement) that it existed prior to purchase. So no case law is required from the plaintiff.

adv. rajeev ( rajoo ) (Expert) 28 September 2009
Burden lies on both to prove their contentions.

n.k.sarin (Expert) 28 September 2009
I do not agree with the above contention. No doubt that law is 'who assert, must prove'. Now here is bonafide purchaser denied the previous agreement, hence burden lie on plaintiff to prove that previous agreement existed.

A. A. JOSE (Expert) 28 September 2009
I am in complete agreement with the view expressed by Mr.Sarin.

joyce (Expert) 29 September 2009
Burden of proof lies on the plaintiff. As to case laws hope to know from other experts. The issues framed by the court also includes.

Previous

Next

You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .

Click here to login now