Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.45 seconds)
Gupta Brothers vs Lasya Priya Garments on 27 August, 2025 cites

M/S Kumar Exports vs M/S Sharma Carpets on 16 December, 2008

11. It is settled law that once the execution of cheque is admitted, Presumption under section 139 of NI act is raised in favour of the complainant. The presumption raised is a rebuttable presumption and the onus on the accused to raise a probable defence. The standard of proof for rebutting, the presumption is that of preponderance of probabilities. [Basalingappa Vs. Mudibasappa (AIR 2019 SC 1983) See also Kumar Exports Vs. Sharma Carpets (2009) 2 SCC 513]
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 3169 - J M Panchal - Full Document

Sampelly Satyanarayan Rao vs Indian Renewable Energy Development ... on 19 September, 2016

15.2 On this point, it is profitable to mention the judgment of Sampelly Satyanarayana Rao v. Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd., (2016) 10 SCC 458, Sripati Singh vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr., 2021 SCC Online SC 1002 and Sunil Todi vs. State of Gujarat & Anr., 2021 SCC Online SC 1174, wherein it has been held that merely because a cheque has been issued for only security purposes will not absolve the accused from the liability u/s. 138 NI Act. It has been further held that a cheque issued as security pursuant to a financial transaction cannot be considered as a worthless piece of paper under every circumstance. It has been held by the Hon'ble Court that the accused would very much be liable u/s. 138 NI Act for issuance of a security cheque also, if on the date of the presentation of such cheque, there has not been a prior discharge of debt, or if the cheque has not been given towards advance payment, the goods in respect of which have not been received by the other party, or if other than this there has been change in circumstances which precludes the complainant from depositing the cheque with the bank.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 492 - A K Goel - Full Document

Rajesh Jain vs Ajay Singh on 9 October, 2023

29. Reliance is being placed upon dictum of the Apex Court in CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3126 OF 2023 (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.12802 of 2022) Rajesh Jain versus Ajay Singh, raison d'etre of which circled around the questioning of the want of evidence on part of the complainant, in order to support his allegation of having extended loan to the accused, whereas it was held that the Courts ought to have instead concerned itself with the case set up Digitally signed RAVISHA by RAVISHA SIDANA SIDANA Date: 2025.08.27 16:21:28 +0530 CC NO. 3917/2019 M/S GUPTA BROTHERS v. M/S LASYA PRIYA GARMENTS PAGE 15 OF 16 by the accused and whether he had discharged his evidential burden by proving that there existed no debt/liability at the time of issuance of cheque.
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 1 - A Kumar - Full Document
1   2 Next