The issues in the civil trial are decided on the basis of balance of probability and not on the basis of proof beyond reasonable doubt as in the case of a criminal trial. It would be instructive to quote from the celebrated judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in N.G. Dastane, Dr. v. S. Dastane 1975 AIR (SC) 1534 in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has delineated regarding this in para 24 and 25 of the judgement which is quoted herein below:
“24. The normal rule which governs civil proceedings is that a fact can be said to be established if it is proved by a preponderance of probabilities. This is for the reason that under the Evidence Act, Section 3, a fact is said to be proved when the court either believes it to exist or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists. The belief regarding the existence of a fact may thus be founded on a balance of probabilities. A prudent man faced with conflicting probabilities concerning a fact situation will act on the supposition that the fact exists, if on weighing the various probabilities he finds that the preponderance is in favour of the existence of the particular fact.