Sri S N Raju vs Sri R Raju on 20 December, 2021
11. In the case on hand, issuance of the cheque
and signature found therein is not in dispute. As such, the
complainant enjoys the presumption under Section 118
and 139 of the NI Act. Complainant having stepped into
the witness box and reiterating the contents of the
complaint and relying on demand promissory note, has
discharged the initial burden. The accused no doubt
examined himself as DW.1 to rebut the presumption
available to the complainant. But, his oral testimony is not
sufficient to rebut the presumption. Accused also took a
contention that the debt was time barred. But, Trial
Magistrate, after considering the principles of law
enunciated by this Court in the case of Basanthi Pictures
12
Vs. M.A.Ganesh Murthy, in Crl.Appeal No.758/2004,
in paragraph 5 has held as under: