§ SECTION 112 · BSA 2023 · CHAPTER VII — BURDEN OF PROOF

Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and tenant, principal and agent

Established relationships are presumed to continue. Once people are shown to have been acting as partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, the law takes that bond to still stand — so whoever says it never existed, or has ended, must prove it.

How to read Section 112

Shown to act as such → the relationship is presumed to continue → who denies or ends it must prove.

Shown to act

It is shown they have been acting as partners / landlord-tenant / principal-agent.

Presumed to continue

The law takes that relationship to still stand.

Who denies proves

Whoever affirms it does not exist, or has ceased, must prove it.

The bare Act

The section in its own words — a single sentence, with no illustration.

Section 112 · verbatim

When the question is whether persons are partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, and it has been shown that they have been acting as such, the burden of proving that they do not stand, or have ceased to stand, to each other in those relationships respectively, is on the person who affirms it.

In short: some relationships, once entered, are taken to carry on until the contrary is shown. If it is proved that two people have actually been acting as partners, as landlord and tenant, or as principal and agent, the law does not make the other side keep re-proving that the bond still exists. Instead the onus falls on whoever wants to say the relationship never existed or has since ended — that party must prove it. It is a rule of continuance: a state of things shown to exist is presumed to persist, and the person asserting the change carries the burden.

→ This carries forward IEA 1872 § 109 — the presumption of continuance of an established relationship.

Glossary

partners

Persons carrying on a business together for profit.

landlord and tenant

One who lets property and one who holds it under him.

principal and agent

One on whose behalf another acts, and that other.

acting as such

Conducting themselves in that relationship.

do not stand / have ceased to stand

The relationship never existed, or has since ended.

the person who affirms it

Whoever asserts the denial or the ending.

The picture

Shown acting as such — the relationship is presumed to continue, and its denial or ending must be proved.

The section, part by part

Tap a part — the picture-story tells it first; the word-by-word text and example follow.

The ruleThe three relationships

the ruleShown acting as such — the bond is presumed to continue

In one lineOnce it is shown that people have been acting as partners / landlord-tenant / principal-agent, the burden of proving the relationship never existed or has ceased is on the person who affirms that.

When the question is whether persons are partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, and it has been shown that they have been acting as such,shown acting as one of the three relationships…there is proof they actually behaved as partners, landlord & tenant, or principal & agent…

the burden of proving that they do not stand, or have ceased to stand, to each other in those relationships respectively, is on the person who affirms it.→ who says it never was / has ended must prove it…so the relationship is presumed to continue; whoever asserts it never existed or has ceased carries the burden.

ExampleTwo people ran a shop openly as partners. One now says the partnership ended before a certain debt was incurred — to escape it, he must prove the ending; it is not presumed.

✗ Not thisThe presumption bites only once acting-as-such is shown — it does not create a relationship from nothing. And it is confined to these three relationships.

the three relationshipsPartners · landlord-tenant · principal-agent — each presumed to continue

In one lineThe rule names three relationships: partners, landlord and tenant, and principal and agent — each, once shown, is presumed to persist.

ExampleAn agent’s authority, once shown, is presumed to continue — a principal who says he had revoked it before a deal must prove the revocation.

✗ Not thisContinuance is a presumption of fact that shifts the burden — it is rebuttable: solid proof that the relationship ended will displace it.

Connected provisions

§ 110 · kin

IEA 1872, § 109

Carried forward — continuance of an established relationship.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — Section 112: Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and tenant, principal and agent