Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.22 seconds)Section 138 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 139 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 118 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 101 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
M/S Kalamani Tex vs P. Balasubramanian on 10 February, 2021
18. On careful examination of all the documents of
complainant, it is very clear that the complainant filed this
complaint well within time and complied all the ingredients of
N.I. Act 1881. The presumption Under Section 139 of the Act
20 C.C.No.6104 OF 2018
SCCH-26
is a presumption of law, it is not a presumption of fact. This
presumption has to be raised by the court in all the cases once
the factum of dishonor is established. The onus of proof to
rebut this presumption lies on the accused. The standard of
such rebuttable evidence depends on the facts and
circumstances of each case. Such evidence must be sufficient
to prove the case. Therefore a mere explanation is not
sufficient to rebut this presumption of law. It is profitable to
refer and relied Hon'ble Apex court recent decision passed in
Criminal Appeal No.123/2021 arising out of special leave
petition (criminal) 1876/2018 between M/s Kalamani Tex
and another Vs P.Balasubramanian disposal date on
10-02-2021 (three judges bench). In this case, Apex court
held that, once signature on cheque admitted by the
accused, court ought to have presume that, cheque was
issued as consideration for a legally enforceable debt.