Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Jobin Sebastian, J
P.A.Siddique – Appellant
Versus
P.V.Pavithran – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural background and trial findings regarding dishonour of cheque. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. parties argument regarding financial capacity and presumption of debt. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. scope of revisional jurisdiction and non-interference principle. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. application of statutory presumption (section 139) and evidentiary burden. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
ORDER
Under challenge in this revision petition is the conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, the “N.I. Act”).
2. The revision petitioner is the accused in S.T. No. 6/1999 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur.
3. The case of the complainant is that the accused borrowed a sum of Rs.85,000/- from him and, in discharge of the said liability, issued a cheque for the said amount in favour of the complainant. However, upon presentation, the cheque was dishonoured, stating the reason “Funds Insufficient”. Thereafter, the complainant issued a statutory notice to the accused informing him of the dishonour and demanding payment of the cheque amount. Despite receipt of the notice, the accused neit
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
