554 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
3. The General rule regarding Burden of proving good faith.
(i) It is a general principle of law to hold that all persons in their dealings act fairly. Nothing dishonourable or odius is to be attributed to any person. Law will not impute vice and immorality. That being so the person who wishes to impeach the conduct of any person as being dishonest or unfair has the burden of proving dishonesty and unfairness. In other words the burden of proof in respect of good faith is upon the person who allege the absence of good faith. The motive must be proved.
(ii) Section 111 enacts an exception to this general rule and prescribes the circumstances in which a person must prove affirmatively the presence of good faith.
If the good faith of a transaction between two parties is questioned by one of them and the two are so related that one stands to the other in a position of Active confidence the burden of proving good faith affirmatively is on the person who stands in the position of active confidence.
This Exception applies only where the two parties to the transaction are so related that one stands to the other in a position of active confidence.
(IV) Meaning of the “ Position of Active Confidence ” :
(i) Position means legal relationship.
(ii) Active confidence means habituated to consult and act on advice.
Position of Active confidence therefore means such legal relationship between the parties as gives rise to the habit in one party to consult the other for the protection of his interest and imposes upon the other the duty to see that his advise is such as will safeguard his interest.
The section contemplates legal relationship between the parties such that it becomes the duty of the person taken in confidence to protect the others interests.
Coulson vs. Allison The rule applies because parties
2.D.F.&J. 581. were husband and wife. Hargeave vs. Everard The rule was not applied because
6.Ir.Ch.R.278. parties were not husband and wife but mistress and paramour.