{"id":245352,"date":"2021-03-11T12:00:31","date_gmt":"2021-03-11T06:30:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=245352"},"modified":"2021-03-19T11:23:57","modified_gmt":"2021-03-19T05:53:57","slug":"section-138-ni-act-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kerala High Court: <\/strong>K. Haripal, J., addressed the instant complaint instituted by the appellant alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Bench remarked,<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThe degree of proof expected from the accused is not as rigorous as that of the complainant. He can discharge his onus by making dents in the case of the complainant.\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u00a0<\/strong>The appellant alleged that, in consideration of a sum of Rs.1,75,000 lend by him to the respondent, a cheque for Rs.1,75,000 dated 25-06-2009 was drawn on Bayar Service Co-operative Bank by the respondent. When the cheque was represented for collection, it got dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds. Although the matter was duly intimated to the respondent, he neither paid the amount nor replied to the notice, aggrieved by the same, he moved the complaint u\/s 138 of NI Act. The respondent denied the allegation that he had borrowed Rs.1,75,000 and issued the cheque in consideration of the same. However, he admitted to have borrowed Rs.30,000 from the complainant but denied the other handwritings on the cheque. According to him, he had given a signed blank cheque to the appellant, which had been misused by incorporating a huge amount as consideration; he argued that there was no legally enforceable liability to pay Rs.1,75,000. Considering the above mentioned, the Trial Court acquitted the respondent finding him not guilty.<\/p>\n

Noticing that the respondent had disputed the financial capacity of the appellant to lend that much money, the Bench observed that the monthly income of the appellant was Rs.2,000. He had to take care of his family with two children for whom he had to earmark Rs.750\/- from the monthly income. Even though he had 3 acres and 5 cents of land, there was no yield from the property. The Bench further expressed, \u201cIt is a \u00a0matter of common knowledge that, as far as rubber plant is concerned, initial years are very tough for the planter; he has to incur huge expenses for nourishing and nursing the plants. He will start to get earnings only when the trees are tapped after six or seven years.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Further, the Bench stated that though the appellant had submitted that he had arranged the amount by availing a loan from a bank and also by pledging gold ornaments, unless the presumption was rebutted, it could not be taken that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable liability. While relying on Bir Singh v. Mukesh Kumar<\/em>, (2019) 4 SCC 197<\/a>, the Bench said, it must be stated, \u201ceven if a signed blank cheque is issued towards a payment, the payee is entitled to fill up the amount and other particulars that will not invalidate the cheque.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

The question before the Bench was whether, the reason that the appellant did not respond the lawyer notice nor did enter the box, should an adverse inference be drawn against him. Relying on Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa, <\/em>(2019) 5 SCC 418<\/a>, the Bench quoted,<\/p>\n

\u201c(ii) Presumption and the onus is on the accused to raise the probable defence. The standard of proof for rebutting the presumption is that of preponderance of probabilities. <\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

(iii) To rebut the presumption, it is open for the accused to rely on evidence led by him or accused can also rely on the materials submitted by the complainant in order to raise a probable defence. Inference of preponderance of probabilities can be drawn not only from the materials brought on record by the parties but also by reference to the circumstances upon which they rely.<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

(iv) That it is not necessary for the accused to come in the witness box in support of his defence, Section 139 imposed an evidentiary burden and not a persuasive burden.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Lastly, the Bench said once execution of the promissory note was admitted, or proved, the presumption under Section 118(a) of the Act would arise that it was supported by consideration. However,<\/p>\n

\n

Merely for the reason that the respondent did not adduce any evidence to prove a negative fact, no adverse inference could be drawn against him. The degree of proof expected from the accused was not as rigorous as that of the complainant. He could discharge his onus by making dents in the case of the complainant. <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Consequently, the Bench held that the appellant had not taken care in adducing evidence to support his ability to pay that much money. The complainant was expected to prove his case to the hilt and he could not take advantage of the failure on the part of the accused respondent. Hence, the appeal was dismissed.[Ramakrishna B.K. v. Narayana Bhat, 2021 SCC OnLine Ker 1151,<\/b><\/a> decided on 09-03-2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Appearance before the Court by:<\/strong><\/p>\n

For Appellant: Senior Adv. V.V.ASOKAN, Adv. P.P.Ramachandran and Adv. M. Ramanya Gayathri<\/p>\n

For Respondents: Adv. M. Sasindran and Sr. Public Prosecutor M. S. Breez<\/p>\n

\n

Kamini Sharma, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Kerala High Court: K. Haripal, J., addressed the instant complaint instituted by the appellant alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of the <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2862,29785,23584],"class_list":["post-245352","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-dishonour_of_cheque","tag-law","tag-section-138-ni-act"],"yoast_head":"\nKer HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Section 138 NI Act\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Section 138 NI Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-03-11T06:30:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-03-19T05:53:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/KeralaHC-e1521442636157.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-03-11T06:30:31+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-03-19T05:53:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":839,\"commentCount\":0,\"keywords\":[\"dishonour of cheque\",\"law\",\"Section 138 NI Act\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/\",\"name\":\"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-03-11T06:30:31+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-03-19T05:53:57+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Section 138 NI Act\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/03\\\/11\\\/section-138-ni-act-2\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact | SCC Times","description":"Section 138 NI Act","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact","og_description":"Section 138 NI Act","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-03-11T06:30:31+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-03-19T05:53:57+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/KeralaHC-e1521442636157.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact","datePublished":"2021-03-11T06:30:31+00:00","dateModified":"2021-03-19T05:53:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/"},"wordCount":839,"commentCount":0,"keywords":["dishonour of cheque","law","Section 138 NI Act"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/","name":"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-03-11T06:30:31+00:00","dateModified":"2021-03-19T05:53:57+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Section 138 NI Act","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/11\/section-138-ni-act-2\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ker HC | Dishonour of cheque shall be proved to the hilt; Adverse inference cannot be drawn under S. 138 of NI Act merely because evidence is not adduced to prove a negative fact"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":250568,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/01\/drawers-signature-differs\/","url_meta":{"origin":245352,"position":0},"title":"Madras HC | Cheque returned with endorsement “drawers signature differs”. If complainant fails to prove accused was not stranger, can he still be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act? Court answers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 1, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: P. Velmurugan, J., addressed a matter revolving around the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A complaint was filed for an alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Judicial Magistrate found the respondent guilty of offence under Section 138 NI\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":266788,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/12\/banks-slip-denoting-cheque-has-been-dishonoured-a-prima-facie-evidence-tis-hazari-courts\/","url_meta":{"origin":245352,"position":1},"title":"Law on S. 146 NI Act | Bank\u2019s slip denoting cheque has been dishonoured: A prima facie evidence? Explained by Tis Hazari Courts","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 12, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi: While addressing a decision revolving around Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Sanjay Sharma-II, Additional Sessions Judge-03, upheld the decision of the Trial Court and held that all the ingredients of Section 138 NI Act were fulfilled by the complainant. A criminal appeal under\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Tis-hazari","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":208819,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/01\/28\/mad-hc-unlawful-for-holder-of-cheque-to-fill-date-and-amount-in-blank-cheque-beyond-knowledge-of-accused-execution-of-cheque-explained\/","url_meta":{"origin":245352,"position":2},"title":"Madras HC | Unlawful for holder of cheque to fill date and amount in blank cheque beyond knowledge of accused; execution of cheque explained","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 28, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: The Bench of M.V. Muralidharan, J. upheld the order of respondent's\u00a0acquittal for an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 while holding that\u00a0\"the different ink, pen, and manipulation of the amount would show that the complainant had failed to demonstrate due execution of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":241074,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/22\/ni-actkar-hc-if-the-complainant-produces-evidence-regarding-the-transaction-as-well-as-dishonour-of-cheuque-is-it-still-necessary-to-examine-the-banker-to-prove-the-endorsement-issued-by-him-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":245352,"position":3},"title":"[NI Act]Kar HC | If the complainant produces evidence regarding the transaction as well as dishonour of cheque, is it still necessary to examine the banker to prove the endorsement issued by him? HC decides","author":"Editor","date":"December 22, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: John Michael Cunha J., allowed the appeal and sets aside the impugned order. The case involves default under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for the discharge of hand loan of Rs 5,00,000 by the petitioner. The notice was issued by the appellant\/ complainant demanding the payment\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":255614,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/14\/law-on-dishonour-of-cheque\/","url_meta":{"origin":245352,"position":4},"title":"Law on Dishonour of Cheque | Loan given in cash, no documentary evidence available. Lender files a complaint under S. 138 NI Act: Read how \u2018presumption\u2019 under S. 118 (a) plays a role","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 14, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Patiala House Courts, New Delhi: Prayank Nayak, MM-01 acquitted the accused of offence under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1885, holding that the accused successfully dislodged the statutory presumption. In the present matter, complaint was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Patiala House Courts, Delhi","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":266804,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/13\/law-on-liability-of-guarantor-dishonour-of-cheque-section-138-ni-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":245352,"position":5},"title":"Liability of Guarantor for Cheque Dishonour: Can lender enforce his right against either principal borrower or his guarantor? Dwarka Courts answers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 13, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Dwarka Courts, Delhi: Rahul Jain, Metropolitan Magistrate, while addressing a matter regarding dishonour of cheque, held that mere assertion of non-receipt of legal notice cannot help the accused in escaping liability under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It was alleged in complaint that accused had approached the complainant to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Dwarka-Court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Dwarka-Court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Dwarka-Court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Dwarka-Court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Dwarka-Court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245352","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=245352"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245352\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=245352"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=245352"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=245352"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}