9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 312X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an instrument is established, the presumption under Section 118 of Negotiable Instruments Act is that the said instrument was supported by consideration - it is crystal clear that the cheque in question was issued only towards the partial payment of promissory note debt as rightly contended by the learned counsel for respondent herein. Petition dismissed. - Crl.R.C.No.972 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 13-12-2017 - Teekaa Raman, J. For the Petitioner : Mr.T.L.Thirumalaisamy For the Respondent : Mr.K.Venkata Subban ORDER The accused has preferred this Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C., against the judgment dated 31.01.2011 made in C.A.No.63 of 2009 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge at Namakka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng fully well that he has no sufficient funds in his Bank-account. 5. The learned counsel for revision petitioner/accused invited the attention of this Court pertaining to the ingredients under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and also the presumption arising under Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act. In this regard, he has relied a Judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Krishna Janardhan Bhat Vs.Dattatraya G.Hegde reported in 2008(1) CTC 433. The Supreme Court, in the said judgment has observed the three ingredients of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and further emphasized therein that Section 139 merely raised presumption that cheque was drawn in discharge of debt or other liability and presumption cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent/claimant has produced the original promissory before the Court and also examined the Scribe as a witness, thereby established the execution of the promissory note dated 25.04.2003. On the other hand, the revision petitioner/accused did not adduce any contrary evidence to disprove the contents of the promissory note dated 25.04.2003. 8. In such circumstances, both the Courts below have concurrently found that the promissory note dated 25.04.2003 was executed by the revision petitioner/accused. Once the execution of an instrument is established, the presumption under Section 118 of Negotiable Instruments Act is that the said instrument was supported by consideration. That apart, the oral and documentary evidence adduced before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
