Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.23 seconds)Section 138 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Bir Singh vs Mukesh Kumar on 6 February, 2019
In Bir Singh v. Mukesh Kumar (2019(1) KHC 774), the
Apex Court held as under:
The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
K.N. Beena vs Muniyappan And Another on 18 October, 2001
774), K.N.Beena v. Muniyappan and Ors. [(2001) 8 SCC 458],
Laxmi Dyechem vs. State of Gujarat and Ors. [(2012) 13 SCC
375] and contended that the presumption under Section 139 N.I
Act entails an obligation on the court to presume that the cheque
in question was issued by the drawer or accused in discharge of a
debt or liability. It was contended by the learned counsel for the
complainant that the onus to rebut the presumption under Section
139 of the N.I Act that the cheque has been issued in discharge of
Crl.R.P.No.540 of 2018 5 2025:KER:40401
a liability is on the accused and in the case at hand accused has
not rebutted the presumption.
M/S Laxmi Dyechem vs State Of Gujarat & Ors on 27 November, 2012
774), K.N.Beena v. Muniyappan and Ors. [(2001) 8 SCC 458],
Laxmi Dyechem vs. State of Gujarat and Ors. [(2012) 13 SCC
375] and contended that the presumption under Section 139 N.I
Act entails an obligation on the court to presume that the cheque
in question was issued by the drawer or accused in discharge of a
debt or liability. It was contended by the learned counsel for the
complainant that the onus to rebut the presumption under Section
139 of the N.I Act that the cheque has been issued in discharge of
Crl.R.P.No.540 of 2018 5 2025:KER:40401
a liability is on the accused and in the case at hand accused has
not rebutted the presumption.
C.C. Alavi Haji vs Palapetty Muhammed & Anr on 18 May, 2007
In C.C.Alavi Haji v. Palappetty Muhammed and another
[(2007) 6 SCC 555], the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that
where the payee despatches the notice by registered post with
correct address of the drawer of the cheque, the principle
incorporated in Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 would
be attracted; the requirement of Clause (b) proviso to Section 138
of Negotiable Instruments Act stands complied with and cause of
action to file a complaint arises on the expiry of the period
prescribed in Clause (c) of the said proviso for payment by the
drawer of the cheque. Nevertheless, it would be without prejudice
to the right of the drawer to show that he had no knowledge of the
notice was brought to his address.
Section 20 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 87 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The General Clauses Act, 1897 [Entire Act]
1