Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Gopal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Hira Lal (since deceased) through LRs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 21.04.2023, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Kullu, District Kullu, vide which the judgment and order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Banjar, District Kullu (learned Trial Court) were upheld. (Parties shall hereinafter bereferred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the complainant filed a complaint before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short ‘NI Act’). It was asserted that the complainant and the accused were known to each other. The accused borrowed a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- from the complainant. The accused issued a cheque of Rs. 6,50,000/- drawn on the State Bank of India, Banjar to discharge his liability. The complainant presented the cheque before the Bank, but it was dishonoured with an endorsement ‘insufficient funds’. The complainant sent a notice to the accused asking him to pay the amount. The registered A.D. containing the notice was rec
The presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the accused must provide evidence to counter it; failure to do so results in conviction.
The presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is strong and can only be rebutted by substantial evidence, which the accused failed to provide.
Presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 NI Act arise on implicit admission of cheque issuance via cross-examination; accused must rebut with evidence, not mere denial; revisional jurisdiction limi....
Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a dishonoured cheque establishes a presumption of liability that the accused must rebut; mere denial is insufficient in the absence of evidence.
The presumption under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act mandates that once a cheque's issuance is admitted, it is presumed to be for a legally enforceable debt, shifting the burd....
The presumption of consideration under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act shifts the burden to the accused to disprove the cheque's issuance for a legal liability, which was not s....
The presumption of consideration under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies once a cheque's issuance is admitted, shifting the burden to the accused to rebut this presumptio....
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
