https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274651 Once both parties have adduced evidence, burden of proof is ordinarily not decisive except in exceptional cases; the court may assess the record as a whole and draw adverse inference from failure to produce better evidence. On the facts discussed, discrepancies in the plaintiff's case and supporting material for the defendants meant the concurrent findings on nominal and fraudulent transfer were left undisturbed. The text also states that an affidavit by a living person is not substantive evidence merely because it is filed in court; oral evidence should ordinarily be given in open court, and material must satisfy admissibility and relevance requirements before it can be relied upon. en-us Thu, 27 Jan 1949 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Aug 2018 16:02:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274651 Once both parties have adduced evidence, burden of proof is ordinarily not decisive except in exceptional cases; the court may assess the record as a whole and draw adverse inference from failure to produce better evidence. On the facts discussed, discrepancies in the plaintiff's case and supporting material for the defendants meant the concurrent findings on nominal and fraudulent transfer were left undisturbed. The text also states that an affidavit by a living person is not substantive evidence merely because it is filed in court; oral evidence should ordinarily be given in open court, and material must satisfy admissibility and relevance requirements before it can be relied upon. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 27 Jan 1949 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274651