Back
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN
A. Sundararajan – Appellant
Versus
V. C. R Finance Rep. by its Managing Partner, V. C. Ravichandran, Salem – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate - IV, Salem in S.T.C.No.971 of 2015 order dated 25.07.2017 and the order of Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No.101 of 2017 dated 27.11.2018 ought to be set aside and the petitioner be acquitted.)
1. The convicted accused is the revision petitioner herein.
2. The matter arises under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act,1881.
3. The revision petitioner has been charged and tried for the offence under Section 138-A of Negotiable Instrument Act,1881 the respondent filed complaint under Section 200 of Criminal Procedure Code,1973 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Salem in S.T.C.No.971 of 2015.
4. The brief facts of the case filed by the complainant/respondent is that:
(a) The appellant borrowed a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Only) on 18.02.2015 from the complainant as a hand loan for his urgent family and business expenses and agreed to pay the amount in with interest at the rate of 18%. As per the accused''s request, the complainant had deducted 10 months interest i.e., Rs.90,000/- from the principal amount with a condi
The burden of proof on the accused to disprove the existence of any legally recoverable debt or liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
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.
The main legal point established is that the issuance of a cheque to discharge an existing liability under the NI Act can be established based on evidence of borrowing and admission of the debt by th....
Accused cannot rebut statutory presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act without entering witness box.
The legal presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act can be rebutted by providing oral or documentary evidence, and new pleas cannot be raised for the first time in the criminal revision.
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.
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
