On presumption raised where property is purchased in name of another: the Court will imply or presume in a situation where a purchase of property is made in the name of anther that other holds the property for the benefit of the person who advanced money for the purchase of the property. The law in such a situation presumes that the intention was that the property should be held on trust by the third transferee. The same principle applies where the purchase money was provided partly by the person to whom the property is transferred and partly by another or others. In such cases, the transferee holds the property in trust for all the persons who contributed to paying for it with each having beneficial interest proportionate to the amount of purchase money he advanced. In the instant case, although the respondent in his evidence before the trial Court said he paid all the money required for the land, contrary to his assertion, all the receipts are in the name of the appellant. The trial Court was right in its evaluation that the pieces of evidence do not create a resulting trust in favour of the respondent. In conclusion, counsel submitted that the above highlighted statements of witness are consistent with their testimony in Exhibit DB8 – DB18 before the Court. That it is settled law that an unchallenged, uncontroverted and uncontradicted averment stands admitted and will be taken as the true state of affairs. Cited the case of Salzgitter Stah (Gmbh) V. Tunji Dosunmu Industrial Ltd (2010) 42 (part 2 NSCQR 1085 at p. 1109, Per C. M Chukwuma – Eneh, Jsc:“Where a party fails to adduce evidence in support of an assertion in his pleading, he is deemed to have abandoned his pleading on the fact”. Also in Omodele Ashabieya & 2ors V. Alhaji Risikatu Lopade & 1or (2011) NWLR (part 1259) page 505 at 534 paragraphs C – D. Counsel submitted that the burden of proof placed on the Plaintiff will not shift until the Plaintiff have proved its case to the satisfaction of the Court that it is entitled to the reliefs sought. Counsel submitted that the Plaintiff has not discharged the burden placed on him in this suit. That a cursory appraisal of Plaintiff’s evidence before the Court and Exhibits tendered, points to the fact that his claims cannot stand. 7