Back
P. S. DINESH KUMAR, T. G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
Jayaram Reddy – Appellant
Versus
G. S. Bhat – Respondent
JUDGMENT
T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA, J.
In this appeal, the defendant has challenged the judgment and decree dtd. 3/3/2014 passed in O.S.No.7645/2009 on the file of the XLI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore (CCH No.42) (for brevity 'the Trial Court').
2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred as per their status before the Trial Court.
3. Brief facts of the plaintiffs' case are, defendant is doing Real Estate business. Plaintiffs have approached the defendant seeking his assistance for purchasing a land in and around Bangalore City. After discussion, defendant demanded Rs.13.00 lakhs from the plaintiffs to procure the lands for them and to obtain necessary permission from the Government for registration of the land. The plaintiffs reposing confidence on the defendant paid a sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs on 21/11/2006 through two cheques bearing No.371925 and 371927 each for Rs.5.00 lakhs drawn on Syndicate Bank, Jayanagar III Block Branch, Bangalore. They also paid another sum of Rs.3.00 lakhs on 22/11/2006 through a cheque bearing No.292750 drawn on Syndicate Bank, Jayanagar III Block Branch, Bangalore. The said cheques have been encashed by the defendant. After encashing
The judgment establishes that a defendant's failure to honor a cheque, coupled with a lack of evidence to support claims of debt repayment or land procurement, results in liability under Section 138 ....
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act can be rebutted by adducing evidence which is to be appreciated on the foundation of the principles of preponderance of probability.
The court established that a defendant must present a substantial defense to avoid summary judgment; mere assertions without evidence do not suffice.
A creditor may enforce a personal guarantee for debt repayment despite dishonoured cheques, under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
The main legal point established is the liability of the Defendants under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and the enforceability of the deed of personal guarantee to secure the outstanding debt....
In recovery suits, admitting receipt of funds shifts burden to recipient to prove claimed commission purpose; failure to explain rate, linkage, or plausibility rejects defense, entitling recovery wit....
Concurrent findings of fact by trial and appellate courts based on evidence are final in a second appeal. Additionally, a party cannot use appellate provisions to introduce additional evidence merely....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
