IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Sathish Kumar, J
Basheera Gani – Appellant
Versus
Usha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Challenge has been made against dismissal of the suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of money, in the present appeal.
2. The parties are arrayed as per their own ranking before the trial Court.
3. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.12,88,125/- with subsequent interest at the rate of 15% per annum on the principal sum of Rs.9,00,000/- from the date of filing of the suit till its realization and to pay the cost of the suit. The case of the plaintiff is that she was selling clothes and organizing chits and also used to lend money for interest to trusted people. The defendant is her neighbor. She has also participated in a chit organized by the plaintiff. At the initial stage, the defendant was honest and prompt in her transaction with the defendant. The defendant purchased the property in which she was residing in the year 2003. Thereafter, further construction has also been made by the defendant. The defendant raised loan from the bank and also from third parties for putting up construction. The defendant agreed to sell two cents of land at Vembakkam at the rate of Rs.3,50,000/- per cent. As the defendant is the most trusted lady at that time, th
The presumption of consideration under the Negotiable Instruments Act applies to issued cheques, placing the burden on the defendant to prove otherwise.
The plaintiff failed to prove the existence of consideration for the cheque, leading to the dismissal of the appeal based on the legal presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
The court established that the burden of proof regarding consideration lies with the plaintiff, and the presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act can be rebutted through circumstantial evidenc....
A promissory note must be supported by consideration and evidence; presumption of validity can be rebutted by proving lack of genuine financial transaction.
The execution of a promissory note establishes a legal presumption of consideration that the defendant must rebut; failure to do so results in judgment favoring the plaintiff.
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.
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 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.
Dishonour of cheque – When a cheque is drawn out and is relied upon by drawee, it will raise a presumption that it is drawn towards a consideration which is a legally recoverable amount.
The presumption in favor of the complainant under the N.I. Act is rebuttable, and the standard of proof required to prove a defense in a criminal case is preponderance of probabilities.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.