Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Gian Chand Singal – Appellant
Versus
Puneet Gautam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 31.12.2012, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Solan, District Solan, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondent (accused before the learned trial court) was acquitted of the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act). (Parties shall hereinafter be referred 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 appeal are that the complainant filed a complaint against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act. It was asserted that the accused was dealing in the business of the sale and supply of surgical and other items. He used to borrow money from the complainant to augment his business. The accused had assured the complainant that he would set up an industry at Baddi in partnership with the complainant. The complainant later on found that the accused was facing financial difficulties, hence, he requested the accused to return the borrowed amount
The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act mandates that a cheque is presumed to be issued for discharge of a debt unless the accused proves otherwise.
Presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires the accused to present credible evidence to rebut the holder's claim of legal liability regarding the cheque issued.
The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act obligates the accused to provide credible evidence to rebut the claim of issuance of a cheque for a legally enforceable debt.
A presumption of debt exists under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which the accused failed to rebut, affirming liability for dishonored cheques.
The presumption under Section 139 of N.I. Act is a presumption of law, as distinguished from the presumption of facts. Presumptions are rules of evidence and do not conflict with the presumption of i....
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....
The presumption of liability under the NI Act is rebuttable, and the burden of proof lies on the complainant to establish the existence of a legally enforceable debt.
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
