https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187820 A plea of undue influence must be specifically pleaded with material particulars and proved by showing both dominance over the donor's will and use of that position to secure an unfair advantage under Section 16 of the Indian Contract Act. In the absence of those foundational facts, the burden does not shift under Section 16(3). A finding on whether one party dominated another's will is ordinarily one of fact, and the High Court could not reappreciate concurrent factual findings in second appeal except within the limited grounds under Sections 100 and 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The High Court therefore erred in reconstructing a new case of undue influence and in shifting the burden without proof. en-us Thu, 06 Nov 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2016 12:22:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187820 A plea of undue influence must be specifically pleaded with material particulars and proved by showing both dominance over the donor's will and use of that position to secure an unfair advantage under Section 16 of the Indian Contract Act. In the absence of those foundational facts, the burden does not shift under Section 16(3). A finding on whether one party dominated another's will is ordinarily one of fact, and the High Court could not reappreciate concurrent factual findings in second appeal except within the limited grounds under Sections 100 and 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The High Court therefore erred in reconstructing a new case of undue influence and in shifting the burden without proof. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 06 Nov 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187820