Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 23643 (1.52 seconds)
Documents citing Basalingappa vs Mudibasappa on 9 April, 2019

Reserved On: 18.07.2025 vs Kusum Sharma on 31 July, 2025

17. On the position of law, the provisions referred to in Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, as also the enunciation of law as made by this Court, need no reiteration as there is no ambiguity whatsoever. In Basalingappav. Mudibasappa [Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, (2019) 5 SCC 418 : (2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 571] relied on by the learned ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2025 21:24:51 :::CIS 27 2025:HHC:25487 counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion therein was against raising presumption, the facts and circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said .
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 54 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sri.Umesh.B vs Sri.Srinivas on 3 March, 2023

The Learned Prosecuting Counsel also relied the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Basalingappa Vs. Mudibasappa wherein it is held that, 'once the accused has rebutted the legal presumption on preponderance of probabilities, the onus shifts on the 31 C.C.8367/2019 complainant to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubts.' So, the law laid down of this judgment became the law of the hand and unanimously applicable to all the cases, but in the case on hand, the accused has failed to raise probable defense and to prove the same on the touch stone of the preponderance of probabilities. Now, I carefully gone through the judgments relied by the Learned Prosecuting Counsel. With due respect to the ratio laid down for these judgments, I am of the considered opinion that, the authority of these judgments are applicable to all the cheque bounce cases whether the accused has admitted the issuance of cheque and the signature thereon to raise legal presumptions in favour of the complainant.
Bangalore District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Reserved On: 20.09.2024 vs Nar Singh Dass on 25 October, 2024

17. On the position of law, the provisions referred to in Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act as well as the enunciation of law as made by this Court need no reiteration as there is no ambiguity whatsoever. In, Basalingappav. Mudibasappa [Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, (2019) 5 SCC 418 : (2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 571] relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion therein was against raising presumption, the facts and circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said case is peculiar to the facts of that case where the consideration claimed to have been paid did not find favour with the Court keeping in view the various transactions and extent of amount involved. However, the legal position relating to the presumption arising under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act on 23 2024:HHC:10303 signature being admitted has been reiterated. Hence, whether there is a rebuttal or not would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case."
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sanjay Sankhyan vs Krishan Kumar Katoch on 26 February, 2024

In, Basalingappa vs. Mudibasappa (supra) relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion therein was against raising presumption, the facts and ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2024 20:30:12 :::CIS 17 circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said case is peculiar to the facts of that case where the consideration claimed .
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Reserved On: 28.05.2025 vs Rajinder Prashad (Since Deceased) ... on 24 June, 2025

17. On the position of law, the provisions referred to in Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, as also the enunciation of law as made by this Court, need no reiteration as there is no ambiguity whatsoever. In Basalingappav. Mudibasappa P a g e | 20 2025:HHC:19452 [Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, (2019) 5 SCC 418 : (2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 571] relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion therein was against raising presumption, the facts and circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said case is peculiar to the facts of that case where the consideration claimed to have been paid did not find favour with the Court keeping in view the various transactions and extent of amount involved. However, the legal position relating to the presumption arising under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act on signature being admitted has been reiterated. Hence, whether there is a rebuttal or not would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case."
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Reserved On: 26.03.2025 vs Uco Bank on 28 April, 2025

17. On the position of law, the provisions referred to in Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, as also the enunciation of law as made by this Court, need no reiteration as there is no ambiguity whatsoever. In Basalingappav. Mudibasappa [Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, (2019) 5 SCC 418 : (2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 571] relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion P a g e | 27 2025:HHC:11237 therein was against raising presumption, the facts and circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said case is peculiar to the facts of that case where the consideration claimed to have been paid did not find favour with the Court keeping in view the various transactions and extent of amount involved. However, the legal position relating to the presumption arising under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act on signature being admitted has been reiterated. Hence, whether there is a rebuttal or not would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case."
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 46 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Reserved On: 18.07.2025 vs Kusum Sharma on 31 July, 2025

17. On the position of law, the provisions referred to in Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, as also the enunciation of law as made by this Court, need no reiteration as there is no ambiguity whatsoever. In Basalingappav. Mudibasappa [Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, (2019) 5 SCC 418 : (2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 571] relied on by the learned ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2025 21:24:31 :::CIS 27 2025:HHC:25489 counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion therein was against raising presumption, the facts and circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said .
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 55 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ravinder Kumar vs Sushil Junk Scrap Dealer & Ors on 1 July, 2025

17. On the position of law, the provisions referred to in Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, as also the enunciation of law as made by this Court, need no reiteration as there is no ambiguity whatsoever. In Basalingappav. Mudibasappa [Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, (2019) 5 SCC 418 : (2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 571] relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion therein was against raising presumption, the facts and circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said case is peculiar to the facts of that case where the consideration claimed to have been paid did not find favour with the Court keeping in view the various transactions and extent of amount involved. However, the legal position relating to the presumption arising under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act on signature being admitted has been ::: Downloaded on - 01/07/2025 21:22:55 :::CIS 25 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:20629 ) reiterated. Hence, whether there is a rebuttal or not would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case."
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 59 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Reserved On: 14.05.2025 vs Uco Bank on 2 June, 2025

17. On the position of law, the provisions referred to in Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, as also the enunciation of law as made by this Court, need no reiteration as there is no ambiguity whatsoever. In Basalingappav. Mudibasappa [Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, (2019) 5 SCC 418 : (2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 571] relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion therein was against raising presumption, the facts and circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said case is peculiar to the facts of that case where the consideration claimed to have been paid did not find favour with the Court keeping in view the various transactions and extent of amount involved. However, the legal position relating to the presumption arising under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act on signature being admitted has been reiterated. Hence, whether there is a rebuttal or not would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case."
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 46 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Reserved On: 12.03.2025 vs Salochna Devi on 24 March, 2025

17. On the position of law, the provisions referred to in Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act as also the enunciation of law as made by this Court need no reiteration as there is no ambiguity whatsoever. In, Basalingappav. Mudibasappa [Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, (2019) 5 SCC 418 : (2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 571] relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent, though on facts the ultimate conclusion therein was against raising presumption, the facts and circumstances are entirely different as the transaction between the parties as claimed in the said case is peculiar to the facts of that case where the consideration claimed to have been paid did not find favour with the Court keeping in view the various 18 2025:HHC:7449 transactions and extent of amount involved. However, the legal position relating to the presumption arising under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act on signature being admitted has been reiterated. Hence, whether there is a rebuttal or not would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case."
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next