Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

26. At this juncture, it is also worth to note judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (2013)3 SCC 86 (Vijay V/s. Laxman and another) where it is held:

"Case set up by holder of cheque itself dubious, thus, held, initial presumption itself comes to an end"

It is further held that:

"Though the evidential burden is initially placed on the defendant by virtue of Section 118 it can be rebutted by the defendant by showing a preponderance of probabilities that such consideration as stated in the pronote, or in the suit notice or in the plaint does not exist and once the presumption is so rebutted, the said presumption "disappears". For the purpose of rebutting the initial evidential burden, the defendant can rely on direct evidence or circumstantial evidence or on presumption of law or fact. Once such convincing rebuttal evidence is adduced and accepted by the Court, having regard to all the circumstances of the case and the preponderance of probabilities, the evidential burden shifts back to the plaintiff who has also the legal burden"