Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI
E.Bhaskar, S/o. Ethiraj – Appellant
Versus
M. Aravind Bagrecha, S/o. B. Madanlal Bagrecha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court details and case numbers (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioners' defenses and claims (Para 2 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. facts of loan requests and payments (Para 6 , 16) |
| 4. court's critical analysis and findings (Para 14 , 19 , 22 , 30 , 31) |
| 5. legal burden of proof in ni act (Para 18) |
| 6. final ruling and acquittal (Para 32 , 33) |
ORDER :
The petitioners have filed these Revision petitions, prays to set aside the judgement in Crl.A.Nos.483, 478, 476, 473, 475, 477 & 474 of 2023, respectively dated 04.08.2025 on the file of the VI Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai against the sentence imposed in C.C.Nos.1641, 3204, 3202, 1640, 1636, 1638 and 1639 of 2019, respectively, dated 04.08.2023 by the learned Metropolitan Fast Track Court No.I, Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai.
3. Before the Trial Court, the respondent/complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , stating that the act of the accused persons attracts an offence punishable under of the . Accordingly, cognizance was taken, summons were issued to the accused persons and, after appearance, copies were furnished. They denied the offences and the trial commenced. On the side of
The court found that the accused, acting as guarantors, were not liable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as no enforceable debt existed at the time of cheque issuance.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the successful rebuttal of the presumption of a legally enforceable debt under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, leading to the failur....
Once there is no denial of issuance of cheque and signatures thereupon, presumption as available under Ss.118 and 139 comes into play.
Cheques issued under Section 138 of the NI Act create a presumption of legally enforceable liability, which the accused must rebut with credible 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.
The main legal point established is the significance of the presumption under Sec. 139 of the N.I. Act and the accused's burden to raise a probable defence to rebut the presumption.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act would arise when the signatures on the cheques had been admitted, and the burden to rebut the ....
Point of Law : Jurisdiction is one of supervisory jurisdiction exercised by High Court for correcting miscarriage of justice.
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
