https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278908 The appeal was dismissed with costs. The Court affirmed the validity of the mortgage bond, finding the plaintiffs fulfilled the burden of proof regarding consideration. Allegations of the bond being nominal or collusive lacked substantial evidence. The Court clarified the legal standing of the Official Receiver, stating they are not a stranger to the document. The plaintiffs proved the execution and recitals, shifting the burden to the defendants who failed to rebut the presumption. en-us Fri, 16 Aug 1929 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Feb 2019 17:10:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278908 The appeal was dismissed with costs. The Court affirmed the validity of the mortgage bond, finding the plaintiffs fulfilled the burden of proof regarding consideration. Allegations of the bond being nominal or collusive lacked substantial evidence. The Court clarified the legal standing of the Official Receiver, stating they are not a stranger to the document. The plaintiffs proved the execution and recitals, shifting the burden to the defendants who failed to rebut the presumption. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Aug 1929 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278908