AUGUSTINO KIRITA new
The respondent's evidence regarding ownership of the disputed land was more credible and consistent, supported by corroborative witness testimony, while the appellant failed to provide consistent documentary and oral evidence or involve village authorities in the sale agreement. The burden of proof was not discharged by the appellant, and the respondent proved ownership on the balance of probabilities.
Source excerpt
- Burden of proof
- Land ownership
- Evaluation of evidence
- Sale of land
- Role of village authorities in land transactions