History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.712.4

v4.c63.712.4

When a person claims a lost article as his he has first to prove his title and possession by evidence (such as that of his kinsmen or a document &c.) and that he had not sold or donated or abandoned it;⁷⁹⁵ after he has proved his title the purchaser is called upon to prove his purchase as honest by evidence i. e. by producing the vendor or by showing that he purchased openly and for adequate price (Kāt. 613, Yāj. II. 170). When this is done the purchaser escapes blame but has to surrender the article to the true owner. Kāt. (616) adds⁷⁹⁶ that in the case of 'asvāmī-vikraya' no other means of proof whether divine or human (except the evidence of witnesses such as kinsmen) is declared to be proper. Acc. to the V. P. p. 293 other evidence and even ordeals may be admissible in sale without ownership, but the Sm. C. p. 216 and the Madanaratna say that on account of the express words of Kāt. this is not possible. If the owner who alleges the loss of an article fails to prove his title and prior possession he has to pay a fine to the king equal to ⅕th of the price of the article. Kāt. (620) and Kauṭ. (III. 16) state that on failure to prove his title the person claiming⁷⁹⁷ the article as his should be fined as a thief, in order to deter (others) from taking undue advantage (i. e. preferring false claims). Kauṭ.⁷⁹⁸ III. 16 and Yāj. II.