Section 42 was granted legal protection to an uneducated female scope plaintiff, an uneducated woman prosecuting for the declaration of a hanging woman, who allegedly executed a general power of attorney. And his son-in-law had contracted to sell in favor of the plaintiff. It was claimed that both said the documents were a result of fraud and misrepresentation. The plaintiff claimed that the plaintiff had admitted the thumb that it marked the attorney's power and sale agreement, so it was his responsibility to prove that the signatures were obtained through a false statement. That the plaintiff was not a capricious woman who could be protected, and it is common understanding that the son-in-law can commit fraud. Legal evidence, led by the plaintiff, indicates that she was not a literate woman, and that she was under stress. Plaintiff's relationship with her son due to litigation between him and his wife was not signed by the plaintiff's close relative and there was no independent legal advice at the time of the alleged transaction under which The cash for sale of the Transfer of Property Property Transfer was paid, in which case it was suspected that the General Power of Attorney was registered through a local commission that never appeared in the witness box. The onus was on the defendant to prove that the documents were based on unconstitutional transactions, however, they did not include the Failed to remove the protections that apply to an illiterate woman in Y t care.
