civil case on the balance of probabilities. Even if I take that there is some contradiction in the evidence of the respondent/plaintiff as PW1 and her witness PW3 with regard to the date of the grant of loan, it is seen that the best proof of the fact that loan has been given by the respondent/plaintiff to the appellant/defendant is the fact that respondent/plaintiff has in her possession original title documents of the property being House no. G-366, J.J. Colony, Shakurpur, Delhi, and there is no reason why a person such as the appellant/defendant would give original title documents of the property unless they were given as security. I also disbelieve the case of the appellant/defendant that she gave original title documents to the respondent/plaintiff to verify the same from the Sub-Registrar’s office, inasmuch as, surely no one gives original documents of an immovable property just like that to any person with the fact that there is no reason why the appellant/defendant herself could not have got the aspect of registration verified with respect to the papers of the property being House no. G-366, J.J. Colony, Shakurpur, Delhi either directly or through her husband or any of her close acquaintances. Therefore, I hold that the courts below have rightly held that respondent/plaintiff had given a loan of Rs.2,00,000/- to the appellant/defendant as evidenced from the Undertaking Ex.PW1/3 dated 28.3.2007 and the fact that
