<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1927 (10) TMI 2 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467951</link>
    <description>An oral trust is proved only by clear evidence of an intention to create a binding trust, identifiable trust property and a definite beneficiary. The burden lies on the party asserting the trust, and interested oral testimony, without certainty or corroboration, is insufficient. Account entries must show that the property was actually set apart for the stated charitable purpose; inconsistent later dealings and the absence of completed divestment of ownership weigh against a trust. On the facts, the entries, including a credit in the name of a deity, and the surrounding circumstances indicated only a possible charitable intention, not a constituted trust. No valid trust was established over either the alleged one lakh rupees or the balance of Rs. 88,914-9-3.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 1927 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 12:59:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=896180" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1927 (10) TMI 2 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467951</link>
      <description>An oral trust is proved only by clear evidence of an intention to create a binding trust, identifiable trust property and a definite beneficiary. The burden lies on the party asserting the trust, and interested oral testimony, without certainty or corroboration, is insufficient. Account entries must show that the property was actually set apart for the stated charitable purpose; inconsistent later dealings and the absence of completed divestment of ownership weigh against a trust. On the facts, the entries, including a credit in the name of a deity, and the surrounding circumstances indicated only a possible charitable intention, not a constituted trust. No valid trust was established over either the alleged one lakh rupees or the balance of Rs. 88,914-9-3.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 1927 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>