Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Sita Ram – Appellant
Versus
Baldev Chand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision challenges conviction under section 138 ni act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. trial proceedings and accused's defence statement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. lower courts upheld presumption and conviction. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. petitioner's claims: time-bar, misuse, excessive compensation. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 5. respondent: presumption not rebutted without evidence. (Para 11) |
| 6. revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors, no reappreciation. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. ingredients of section 138 ni offence enumerated. (Para 18) |
| 8. presumption of liability on admitted signature, rebuttable by probabilities. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 9. accused affidavit evidence impermissible under ni act. (Para 22 , 23) |
| 10. contradictory defences fail to rebut presumption. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 11. adverse inference for non-examination of key witness. (Para 26) |
| 12. bank memo presumes dishonour for insufficient funds. (Para 27) |
| 13. notice within 30 days of dishonour memo receipt. (Para 28 , 29) |
| 14. refused notice deemed validly served. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 15. compensation up to twice cheque amount justified. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 16. default imprisonment enforceable for non-payment. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 17. revis |
Section 139 NI Act presumption of liability rebuttable by probable defence on preponderance of probabilities; contradictory accused pleas and non-examination of witness fail rebuttal; revisional juri....
Presumption under NI Act Sections 118/139 arises on cheque issuance admission; security cheque attracts Section 138 liability if debt exists; not rebutted here. Revisional jurisdiction limited to per....
Presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 NI Act arises on cheque execution admission; accused must rebut by evidence, not mere Section 313 statement. Security cheque liable if debt exists. Revisiona....
Revisional court cannot re-appreciate evidence absent perversity; NI Act presumption u/s 139 rebuttable by preponderance of probabilities, accused's uncorroborated denial insufficient; notice returne....
Admission of cheque issuance triggers Section 139 presumption of debt discharge, rebuttable only by probable defence on preponderance of probabilities; uncorroborated security claim fails rebuttal; r....
The presumption of liability under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, placing the burden on the accused to prove otherwise.
Admission of cheque signature raises presumption under NI Act ss.118(a),139 of debt discharge; accused must rebut with evidence, not mere denial. Revisional jurisdiction bars reappreciation absent pe....
Revisional jurisdiction limited; no reappreciation of evidence absent perversity. NI Act presumptions u/ss 118,139 arise on cheque admission; accused must rebut with evidence. No initial complainant ....
Admission of cheque signature triggers presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 NI Act of debt discharge; security cheques attract Section 138 liability on dishonour; accused must rebut with evidenc....
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
