Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

V.R. Arul Deiveegan vs Muthukumaran on 19 December, 2025

Author: Prashant Kumar Mishra

Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                                          1

     ITEM NO.33                                COURT NO.16                         SECTION XII

                                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F            I N D I A
                                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

              Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                   No(s).    36722/2025

     [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-11-2024
     in AS No. 680/2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
     Madras]

     V.R. ARUL DEIVEEGAN                                                         Petitioner(s)

                                                     VERSUS

     MUTHUKUMARAN                                                                Respondent(s)

     FOR ADMISSION
     IA No. 328551/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

     Date : 19-12-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE

     For Petitioner(s) :
                                      Mr. Rahul Koushik, Sr. Adv.
                                      Ms. R. Shase, AOR
                                      Mr. Sibi Kargil. V, Adv.
                                      Mr. Ajay Prabu .s, Adv.

     For Respondent(s) :

                         UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

                                                 O R D E R

1. Learned senior counsel, Mr. Rahul Koushik, appearing for the petitioner submits that when the respondent/plaintiff preferred a criminal complaint against the petitioner for the offence punishable Signature Not Verified under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Digitally signed by NISHA KHULBEY Date: 2025.12.19 16:50:22 IST Reason: 1881 (for short, ‘NI Act’), the said complaint was dismissed throughout on the reasoning that the accused has successfully rebutted the presumption 2 raised under Section 139 of the NI Act with regard to the existence of the legally enforceable debt or other liability and that no evidence was led in by the complainant to show that the accused has executed any cheque only in discharge of a legally enforceable debt. According to the learned senior counsel, in view of such finding, the Trial Court as also the High Court in the present suit for recovery of the amount, has recorded a perverse finding vis- a-vis, the existence of a legally enforceable debt.

2. Issue notice, returnable on 24.02.2026.

3. In the meanwhile, subject to petitioner depositing 50% of the decretal amount as on today before the Registry of this Court within four weeks, the execution of the decree/ execution proceedings shall remain stayed.

    (NISHA KHULBEY)                          (CHETNA BALOONI)
SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT                    COURT MASTER (NSH)