Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2017 (12) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (12) TMI 1761 - HC - Indian Laws


Issues:
Appeal against acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis:
The appellant challenged the lower Appellate Court's judgment acquitting the respondent of the charge under Section 138 of the NI Act. The appellant argued that the lower court erred in reversing the trial court's judgment based on flimsy reasons. The appellant contended that the complainant had proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt, supported by necessary records and the presumption in favor of the appellant. The lower court was criticized for ignoring the presumption arising from the dishonor of the cheque and for treating the case as a civil suit. The appellant highlighted the evidence presented by the complainant-witness and emphasized the liability of the respondent in purchasing goods from the appellant.

The respondent's counsel opposed the appeal, supporting the lower court's judgment. It was argued that the appellant failed to prove any outstanding liability against the respondent through documentary evidence, despite being a company maintaining all records. The respondent's defense focused on the lack of proof of outstanding liability and the absence of evidence supporting the appellant's claim.

Upon reviewing the evidence and arguments from both parties, the judge noted that the cheque issued by the respondent was dishonored, and the legal notice under Section 138 of the NI Act went unanswered. The complainant successfully proved the liability against the respondent, and the defense claiming the cheque was stolen was deemed false and an afterthought. The trial court's detailed analysis of the evidence supported the complainant's case, emphasizing the dishonor of the cheque and the completion of all legal formalities.

The judge criticized the lower Appellate Court's reasoning for acquitting the respondent, noting that the court disregarded the presumption under Section 138 of the NI Act due to the respondent's failure to present any contrary evidence. The lower court's approach was deemed faulty as it ignored the purpose of the NI Act for swift resolution of claims. The judge highlighted the importance of the account book as evidence and criticized the lower court's reliance on irrelevant factors like differences in signatures and resolution dates. Consequently, the judge set aside the lower court's judgment and restored the trial court's decision, ordering implementation within a specified timeframe.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates