Back
G. RADHA RANI
K. Arun Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. , – Respondent
ORDER :
This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the revision petitioner/appellant/accused assailing the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.43 of 2010, dated 31.03.2011, by the XVI Additional Judge, City Civil Court–cum– XX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Hyderabad, as confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.188 of 2011, dated 17.06.2013, by the II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner/appellant/accused, and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/complainant.
3. The parties herein will be referred to as per their array before the Trial Court.
4. The case of the complainant was that the complainant and accused were known to each other and out of the said acquaintance, the accused borrowed a sum of Rs.1 lakh from the complainant on 16.03.2007 with a promise to repay the same with interest of Rs.10,000/- in the month of August, 2007, and issued two cheques therefor bearing No.042930, dated 10.04.2009, for Rs.50,000/- and another cheque bearing No.042931, dated 15.04.2009, for Rs.30,000/-, and agreed to repay the remaining amount by way of cash. The complainant presented the cheque bearing No.042930, dated 1
Admission of cheque signature raises NI Act presumptions of debt discharge (ss.118(a),139); accused must rebut with evidence, not mere denial. Security/blank signed cheques attract s.138 liability de....
Dishonour of cheque – By making a higher demand in a notice sent under Section 138(b) of N.I. Act, would not by itself invalidate notice provided, details of claim towards additional amounts are spec....
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....
Point of law : Negotiable instruments - Though in the notice, the demand for compensation, interest, cost, etc. is also made, the drawer will be absolved from his liability under Section 138 of the N....
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.
Revisional jurisdiction limited to perversity; presumption under Sections 118/139 NI Act on cheque admission; security cheque liable if debt subsists; unclaimed notice deemed served; post-dishonour r....
Revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors, no reappreciation absent perversity; presumption of debt under NI Act holds post cheque admission unless robustly rebutted; security cheques attract ....
It has been settled in law that the accused can either adduce independent evidence or rely on the evidence tendered by the complainant to rebut the presumptions.
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
