Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Jobin Sebastian, J, JOBIN SEBASTIAN
V.D. Joseph S/o Devasya – Appellant
Versus
K. Parameswaran S/o Kuppanna Counder – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history and factual background of the case. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. scope and limitations of the court's revisional jurisdiction. (Para 7 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. presumption of service and statutory presumptions in cheque cases. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. modification of sentence and final disposal of the revision. (Para 17 , 19) |
ORDER :
1. Under challenge in this revision petition is the conviction and sentence rendered against the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short “N.I. Act”).
2. The revision petitioner is the accused in S.T. No. 1913/1998 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mannarkad.
3. The case of the complainant is that the accused borrowed a sum of Rs.50,000/- from him and, in discharge of the said liability, issued a cheque for the said amount in his favour. However, upon presentation, the cheque was dishonoured on the ground of “insufficient funds.” Thereafter, the complainant issued a statutory notice to the accused informing him of the dishonour and demanding payment of the cheque amount. Hence, the accused is alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of
A revisional court shall not interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless they suffer from perversity or illegality; furthermore, a notice returned as 'unclaimed' to the correct address is presu....
In a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, once the execution of a cheque is admitted or proven, a presumption under Section 139 arises in favour of the complainant, and the burden shifts to t....
In a Section 138 N.I. Act prosecution, once the execution of a cheque is proven, the statutory presumption under Section 139 shifts the burden to the accused; revisional courts will not interfere wit....
In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, once the execution of the cheque is proved, a statutory presumption under Section 139 arises in favor of the complainant, placing....
The statutory presumptions under Sections 138, 118, and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are critical in dishonour cases, determining the burden of proof.
The High Court's revisional jurisdiction is supervisory in nature and limited to correcting legal improprieties or perversity in findings; it cannot be used to reappreciate evidence where trial and a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the conviction under Section 138 of the N.I.Act based on evidence of borrowal of money, issuance of cheque, and service of notice.
In a revision petition against a conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, the High Court will not reappreciate evidence unless the lower court's findings are perverse, and statutory presumptions....
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
