Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Ekambaram – Appellant
Versus
Premkumar – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Revision Petition is filed to set aside the judgment dated 20.12.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.81 of 2018 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur at Poonamallee confirming the judgment dated 22.11.2017 made in S.T.C.No.73 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court-II (Magisterial Level), Poonamallee.
2. The brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of this Criminal Revision, are as follows:-
2.1. The Complainant in STC No. 73 of 2016 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court-II (Magisterial Level), Poonamallee is a practicing Doctor. The Accused therein acquainted with the Doctor as a patient. In the course of such interaction, the Doctor came to know that the Accused is a real estate dealer. Therefore, he expressed his intention to purchase a house site. In this context, the Complainant and the Accused entered into an agreement of sale dated 25.11.2014 for purchase of an immovable property owned by the Accused and his wife. On execution of such agreement, the Complainant paid Rs.50,00,000/- out of Rs.60,00,000/-. After execution of the agreement of sale, the Com
A cheque issued as a part of a legally enforceable debt invokes a presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which the accused must rebut.
Cheques issued as part of a debt obligation are presumed to be for a lawful debt unless contrary evidence is presented, independent of any pending civil disputes.
The existence of a pending civil suit does not preclude a complainant from pursuing a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonored cheques representing a lega....
The courts affirmed that under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the initial presumption of liability must be rebutted by the accused with satisfactory evidence, which was not done in th....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the importance of proving the contrary to rebut the pres....
Proper adherence to procedural requirements and principles of law in dismissing appeals and considering suspension of sentence under Section 138 of NI Act.
A complaint under Section 138 must provide sufficient details about the relationship and financial capacity; mere presumption is insufficient for conviction without material evidence.
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
