Search Results for "presumption under Section 139"

821 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 821 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Cheque Dishonour Case, Sets Aside Acquittal and Convicts Accused Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Presumption Under Section 139 of NI Act Shifts Burden on Accused, Which Was Not Discharged.

The appellant, Mohammad Murtuza Mohammad Yusuf, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against the respondent, G...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Cheque Dishonour Case, Sets Aside Acquittal. Presumption under Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 applies when signature on cheque is admitted, shifting burden on accused to rebut existence of debt.

The appellant, Bapurao s/o Motiram Mankar, a senior citizen, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against respo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Allows Appeal in Negotiable Instruments Act Case — Rebuttal of Presumption Requires Probable Defence. The court held that the accused must raise a probable defence to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act, and mere denial or inconsistent story is insufficient.

The appellant, Lyndon Rodrigues, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against respondent Anil Thakur for disho...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Cheque Dishonour Case, Sets Aside Acquittal. Presumption under Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 applies once cheque and signature are admitted, shifting burden on accused to rebut existence of debt.

The appellant, Nitin Bapurao Mankar, was the original complainant in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against re...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Acquits Accused in Cheque Bounce Case Due to Time-Barred Debt. Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Dishonour of Cheque - Presumption under Section 139 rebutted by accused showing loan was time-barred, hence not legally enforceable.

The present revision petition was filed by the accused (petitioner) challenging her conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 18...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Negotiable Instruments Act Case — Reinstates Conviction Under Section 138. Partial Recovery Before Cheque Issuance Does Not Rebut Presumption Under Section 139 N.I. Act When Cheque Covers Balance Due.

The appeal arises from a judgment of the Sessions Court, Amravati, which set aside the conviction of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable I...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Conviction Under Section 138 N.I. Act — Presumption of Legally Enforceable Debt Not Rebutted. Accused Failed to Prove Cheques Were Issued as Security, Leading to Confirmation of Sentence of Simple Imprisonment and Compensation.

The applicant, Rekha Mahindra Shah, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonour of three cheques totaling Rs...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Acquits Accused in Cheque Bounce Case Due to Failure to Prove Legally Enforceable Debt. Dishonour of Cheque Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Presumption Under Section 139 Rebutted by Accused Showing Loan Not Advanced.

The case involves a criminal revision petition filed by the accused, Jagadish R, challenging his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instru...