Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.25 seconds)Section 138 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 92 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Rangappa vs Sri Mohan on 7 May, 2010
In Rangappa Vs. Mohan AIR 2010 SC 1898 Hon'ble
Supreme Court has held that "in a complaint under Section 138 NI
Act an accused can seek to establish that complainant's case is not
proved even on a preponderance of probabilities. The accused does
not have to himself lead any evidence for that purpose. The
presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act are
rebuttable..........".
C.C. Alavi Haji vs Palapetty Muhammed & Anr on 18 May, 2007
14 Regarding, the question that whether legal notice has been
received by the accused? Complainant has placed on record legal
notice Ex.CW1/4 alongwith AD card(s)/Registered Cover (s)
Ex.CW1/5(colly). It is a settled position of law that a notice properly
addressed, prepaid and posted by registered post shall be deemed to
be served upon the respondent unless the contrary is proved.
Furthermore, it is not in dispute that accused has been served
through process of the court and once it is so, the decision of
CC No. 85/14 ICICI Bank Vs. VIE Software Pvt Ltd
-:18:-
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Alavi Hazi v. Palapetty Muhammad &
Anr. 2007 STPL (DC) 952 SC would also be applicable wherein
Hon'ble Apex Court has held that even if the accused did not receive
the legal demand notice he can pay the cheque amount within
fifteen days of the service of summons from the court but if he fails,
he cannot contend that he has not received the legal demand notice.
15 It is evident that the drawer has failed to make the payment
of cheque amount in question within 15 days of the receipt of
aforesaid notice, thus, the present complaint U/s 138 NI Act has
been initiated against the accused.