Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.MURALI SHANKAR
Vignesh Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
K.Vasanthi Ramesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the cheque and dishonor. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. discussion on the statutory presumptions. (Para 10 , 12 , 18) |
| 3. examination of the defence and evidence presented. (Para 22 , 26 , 30) |
| 4. concluding observations about liability and judgment. (Para 41 , 43) |
JUDGMENT :
This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment made in S.T.C.No.973 of 2017, dated 29.11.2024 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Sathankulam, in acquitting the respondent/accused for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
3. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties hereinafter will be referred as per their ranking/status before the trial Court.
4.The case of the complainant is :
b) The complainant, presented the cheque for collection through his bank Indian Overseas Bank, Theppakulam Branch and the same was returned as payment stopped by the drawer. Hence, the complainant sent a legal notice, dated 02.06.2011 to the accused demanding them to pay the amount covered by the cheque. Both the accused having received the notice on 03.06.2011, failed to make any payment, but sent a reply notice, dated 15.06.2011 with false and untenable allegations.
A drawer of a cheque may incur liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act unless they can sufficiently rebut the statutory presumptions of consideration and debt.
The court determined that under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the presumption that a cheque was issued to discharge a debt is rebuttable, placing the burden on the accused t....
A presumption of debt exists under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which the accused failed to rebut, affirming liability for dishonored cheques.
A drawer of a cheque is presumed liable unless they provide evidence to rebut the presumption of issuance for debt repayment, established under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
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 statutory presumption under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act establishes that the accused must rebut the existence of a debt with credible evidence; mere denial is insuffici....
The appellate court overturned the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of consideration under the Negotiable Instruments Act, rejecting the accused's claims due to insufficient evidence.
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
