Back
BIRENDRA KUMAR
Nemi Chand S/o. Tara Chand – Appellant
Versus
Sushila Devi W/o. Shyamlal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner brought a complaint case against the respondent no.1 Sushila Devi bearing Criminal Original Case No.181/1994 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
2. The case and claim of petitioner as disclosed in the complaint petition was that the petitioner sold 100 Tins of Oil to respondent no.1 vide bill No.186 dated 18.3.1994. The total cost was Rs.40,600/- @ Rs.406/- per Tin. The respondent no.1 was owner of Sushila & Co. On 23.3.1994 respondent no.1 had issued cheque no.941529 of Rs.40,600/- as payment of cost of Oil. The respondent no.1 had assured that the cheque would be honoured on its presentation. The petitioner presented the cheque with Bank of India, Jodhpur Branch on 23.3.1994. On 25.3.1994 the cheque was returned by the Bank on the ground that funds were insufficient in the account. Thereafter the petitioner send a notice to the respondent no.1 on 06.4.1994 asking for payment of the amount of cheque. On 9.4.1994 respondent no.1 sent a reply to the notice stating therein that she has not purchased any Oil from the petitioner and her signed cheques were misused by her employee Raju Manvani, to whom the respondent no.1 had handed-over
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act shifts the burden of proof to the accused once the complainant establishes the cheque was issued for a debt.
The presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is valid unless a credible defense is presented, and dishonor of a cheque issued as security can lead to conviction un....
Criminal Law - Dishonoured of Cheque - Appeal against conviction - Petitioner in this case, did not raise any probable defence which would create doubts in mind of Court. Court find no reason to inte....
The importance of establishing a probable defense to contest the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Presumption under NI Act ss.118,139 rebuttable on preponderance of probabilities by probable defence; accused's unproved allegation of cheque amount misuse fails rebuttal. Revision jurisdiction limit....
The presumption of a legally enforceable debt under Sections 138 and 139 of the N.I. Act is strong and requires evidence to the contrary by the accused, which was not provided.
A mandatory presumption applies in dishonour cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, requiring the accused to provide evidence to rebut the lawful liability for which a cheque was ....
Insufficient funds for a cheque issued to discharge a lawful liability establishes an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which includes a statutory presumption that must be ....
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
