Court presumptions allow inference of facts from ordinary conduct and withheld evidence, subject to contextual rebuttal. Section 119 permits the Court to presume facts likely to have occurred based on natural events, human conduct and business relations; specified presumptions include possession of stolen goods indicating guilt or receipt, accomplice testimony being suspect absent corroboration, bills accepted as for good consideration, continuance of shown things within expected lifespans, regularity of judicial and official acts, adherence to usual business course, withheld evidence or refusals (when not compellable) being unfavourable to the withholder, and obligations discharged when related documents remain with the obligor. Contextual illustrations show when these presumptions may be rebutted.
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court presumptions allow inference of facts from ordinary conduct and withheld evidence, subject to contextual rebuttal.
Section 119 permits the Court to presume facts likely to have occurred based on natural events, human conduct and business relations; specified presumptions include possession of stolen goods indicating guilt or receipt, accomplice testimony being suspect absent corroboration, bills accepted as for good consideration, continuance of shown things within expected lifespans, regularity of judicial and official acts, adherence to usual business course, withheld evidence or refusals (when not compellable) being unfavourable to the withholder, and obligations discharged when related documents remain with the obligor. Contextual illustrations show when these presumptions may be rebutted.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI OCR ✕
of 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
