...................the veracity of claim?......
First of all, defendent needs to shift the burden of proving that fact with evidence by disagreeing it crisply in the 'say' of the defendent. The 'say' should be submitted in time.
Then Prosecution to adduce the all possible evidence against each issue framed.........again if it not challenged by the defense in regards to its relevancy, credibility, authenticity, reliability, conclusivity and concreteness beyond doubt (or prepoderance of probability ) etc...it 'may'/'shall' be presumed as evidence (b'cos defense was given chance to negate it but defense may have missed it)
Finally if the allegations are 'proved' in the first place, and those 'proved' allegations should be "grave and sufficient enough as a ground(s) for saught relief" to allow for the relief/partial relief saught, then that relief/partial relief is awarded.
Ofcourse there is wording in HMA at least as .....Whether defended or not if the Hon Court finds that grounds for the relief exist then court grants the relief; otherwise not.