Back
P. VELMURUGAN
J. Manikandan – Appellant
Versus
R. Anand – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 read with 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to set aside the order made in Crl.A.No.24 of 2016 on the file of Principal Sessions Court, Kancheepuram District at Chengalpattu dated 11.02.2019 confirming the order in the C.C.No.767 of 2011 on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram dated 06.07.2016.)
1. The Criminal Revision Case has been filed seeking to set aside the order made in Crl.A.No.24 of 2016 on the file of Principal Sessions Court, Kancheepuram at Chengalpattu dated 11.02.2019 confirming the order in C.C.No.767 of 2011 on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram dated 06.07.2016.
2. The petitioner is accused and the respondent is the complainant.
3. The case of the respondent is that the petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs.4,83,000/- from the respondent in order to start a business, after executing promissory notes. Thereafter, when the respondent demanded the petitioner for repayment, the petitioner had issued a cheque bearing No.077465 dated 29.08.2010 drawn at Syndicate bank, Selaiyur Branch, Chennai for a sum of Rs.4,83,000/- and when the respondent presented the said cheque for collection with his banker
The duty of the accused to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the limited scope of revision for interference with lower courts' judgments.
The main legal point established is that once the signature and execution of a cheque are admitted, there is a presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act that the cheque was issu....
The statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act favors the payee in case of dishonour of a cheque, and the burden of proof lies on the drawer to rebut the presumption.
When the issuance of a cheque and the signature thereon are not denied, the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies, shifting the burden to the accused to pr....
The burden of proof on the accused to disprove the existence of any legally recoverable debt or liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Accused cannot rebut statutory presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act without entering witness box.
The admission of issuing a cheque creates a presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act, which must be rebutted by the accused to avoid liability.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, affirming the presumption of a legally enforceable debt and allowing time for payment.
The capacity to advance the loan and the burden of proving the transaction creating an existing debt are fundamental facts that the complainant must establish. The presumption under Section 139 of th....
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
