Indian Evidence Law | Burden of Proof

Section 110 Evidence Act - Burden of Proof as to Ownership

Section 110 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 established a rebuttable evidentiary rule: a person shown to be in possession of property benefits from a presumption of ownership, and the person denying that ownership must prove the contrary. The corresponding current provision is Section 113 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.

Current law: The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024. Section 113 carries forward the ownership rule in former Section 110. The law applicable to a particular proceeding must be determined with reference to commencement and savings provisions.

Text of Section 110 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

When the question is whether any person is owner of anything of which he is shown to be in possession, the burden of proving that he is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he is not the owner.

Section 113 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Section 113, titled Burden of proof as to ownership, preserves the same substantive rule: when a person is shown to possess something and ownership is disputed, the party asserting that the possessor is not the owner bears the burden of proving that assertion.

Read the official Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (India Code PDF), particularly Section 113. The Supreme Court judgment dated 24 March 2025 also discusses Section 113 and the relationship between possession and ownership.

Meaning and scope of the presumption

Possession means factual holding or control of property, assessed in light of the circumstances. Ownership refers to the legal entitlement to property. Burden of proof is the obligation to establish a disputed fact. Under this rule, proved possession is prima facie evidence supporting ownership, but it does not conclusively establish title.

The presumption is rebuttable. A person challenging ownership may produce a valid title deed, evidence of tenancy, a licence, trust arrangements, or other evidence showing that possession does not reflect ownership. The court must evaluate the whole record and the applicable substantive property law.

When does Section 113 apply?

There must be a genuine question concerning ownership of an identifiable thing or property.
The person claiming the benefit of the rule must be shown to be in possession.
Another party must assert that the possessor is not the owner.
The party making that assertion bears the burden of proving non-ownership, subject to other applicable legal rules and evidence.

Practical illustrations

Dispute over movable property

A person is shown to possess a valuable item. Another person alleges that the possessor is not its owner. The challenger must provide evidence supporting that allegation; mere denial does not by itself rebut the inference from possession.

Dispute over land

A person establishes possession of land, while another claims superior ownership. Possession supports a prima facie inference, but the court may examine registered documents, revenue records, the nature of occupation, and competing claims. Possession alone does not automatically override proven superior title.

Tenant in possession

A tenant may physically possess a property without owning it. Proof of a lease or tenancy can rebut any suggestion that the tenant owns the premises merely because the tenant occupies them.

Supreme Court interpretation

In a judgment delivered on 24 March 2025 (2025 INSC 383), the Supreme Court explained that possession is prima facie proof of ownership under Section 113. The Court stated that the provision applies to disputes involving the Government as well as private persons; where the possessor establishes possession, a party asserting contrary ownership must prove its claim.

This does not mean that every occupier acquires ownership, nor does the evidentiary presumption replace rules concerning lawful title, transfer, limitation, or adverse possession.

Old and current statutory provisions

Indian Evidence Act, 1872	Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 110	Section 113
Burden of proof as to ownership	Burden of proof as to ownership
Earlier statutory framework	Current framework from 1 July 2024, subject to savings provisions

Frequently asked questions

Does possession always prove ownership?

No. Possession provides prima facie support for ownership under the statutory rule, but the presumption can be rebutted by evidence of a better title or a different legal basis for possession.

Who must prove that a possessor is not the owner?

The person asserting that the possessor is not the owner bears that burden under Section 113, once the relevant possession is shown.

Is Section 110 of the Evidence Act still the current provision?

The corresponding current provision is Section 113 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. The earlier Evidence Act may remain relevant to proceedings saved by the new legislation.

Can the rule apply when the Government disputes ownership?

Yes. The Supreme Court has explained that Section 113 does not distinguish between Government and private challengers.

Primary legal references

Updated: 20 October 2026. This article provides general legal information and is not a substitute for advice on the facts of a particular case.