Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.22 seconds)A.S. Duraisami Chettiar Sons And Ors. vs S. Rathnaswami Gounder on 11 January, 1991
14. Under Section 118(g) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it shall be presumed that unless the contrary is proved the holder of the cheque, namely, the complainant herein received the cheque of the nature referred to in Section 138 of the Act for the discharge of the debt. It is true that; this presumption is rebuttable. But in the instant; case, there is no need to invoke Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as the materials produced before this Court would make it clear that the accused was liable to pay the cheque amount to the complainant. Therefore, the decisions cited in A.S. Duraisami Chettiar Sons v. S. Rathnaswami Gounder; AIR 1949 Bom 257 Tarmahmed v. Tyeb Ebrahim; 1998 Cri LJ 759 Narender Anand v. Maruthi Udyog Ltd.; would not be of any use in favour of the petitioner/accused.
Section 139 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 73 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 101 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
1