Back
T. AMARNATH GOUD
Tulu Rani Das (Majumder) – Appellant
Versus
Prabir Majumder – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This Criminal revision petition has been filed under Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C. read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 17.02.2020, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, in Crl. Appeal No.42/2017, dismissing the appeal under Section 378(2) of Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 22.11.2017, passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judical Magistrate, West Tripura, Agartala in Case No. NI-79/2012, whereby acquitting the respondent-Prabir Majumder, from the charges framed under Section 138 of NI Act, 1881.
2. The facts of the case in brief, which may be relevant for the present purpose and manifest on the record are that the petitioner herein lodged a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act, 1881 against the respondent No.1. In the complaint, the petitioner stated that she, her brother Dulal Das, and Sister Jhulu Rani Das were the joint owner of land measuring 2.09 acres under R.S. Khatian No.113 Mouja-Guarchand, and the accused person herein as the respondent agreed to purchase the land. After negotiation, the price was settled to Rs.5,00,000/-. The petitioner and two others executed 3(three) sale deeds in favour of the respondent he
Legal enforceability of a debt requires proper adherence to the original agreement terms, including possession delivery, which if modified, undermines the claim under relevant statutory provisions.
The court reaffirmed that the burden of proof lies on the accused to rebut the presumption of service of legal notice and that a cheque issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt constitutes a....
Cheques issued under Section 138 of the NI Act create a presumption of legally enforceable liability, which the accused must rebut with credible evidence.
Criminal Law - Dishonoured of Cheque - Appeal against conviction - Petitioner in this case, did not raise any probable defence which would create doubts in mind of Court. Court find no reason to inte....
Dishonour of cheque – Mere non-filing of any suit by complainant to recover amount due under promissory note does not entitle accused to claim order of acquittal.
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act can be rebutted by adducing evidence which is to be appreciated on the foundation of the principles of preponderance of probability.
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 issuance of a cheque, once signed, creates a presumption of liability under Sec. 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which the accused must rebut to avoid conviction for dishonour due to insuf....
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....
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
