Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: parwanda in Cc No.334/1 Sumat Prasad vs A.B.I.Overseas Ltd. & Anr. Page 1 Of 15 on 27 March, 2015Matching Fragments
15. In view of discussions made in the afore-stated paras, I have reached a conclusion that in totality of these circumstances, complainant has failed to make out a case against the accused while on the other hand, accused has been successful in rebutting the presumptions provided under Section 118 and 139 of the Act. The defence of the accused has raised doubts over the version of complainant. The accused has been successful in raising a probable defence which has created doubt about the existence of legally enforceable debt or liability. The complaint is barred by limitation. The result is obvious. Accused Vipin Parwanda and the company stand acquitted in the present case.