9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1936X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... having thereon the official mark denoting that the cheque has been dishonoured, presume the fact of dishonour of such cheque, unless and until such fact is disproved. As the bank's slip is not disproved by the respondent, it is clearly established that cheque is dishonoured for insufficient fund. The cheque was issued by the Bank of Baroda in the present case and it was submitted before the same Bank. The purpose of enactment of the Act, 1881 is to maintain confidence of Bank transactions. It is clearly established that the cheque was issued to clear the liability of the year 2005 and therefore, argument advanced on behalf of the respondent regarding no transaction took place between the parties after 2003 is not sustainable. Again, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... but the same was dishonoured on 29-10- 2005 with endorsement of exceeds arrangement. On 7-11- 2005 the respondent was served with legal notice but he failed to repay the amount of cheque that is why complaint under Section 138 of the Act, 1881 was filed against the respondent before the trial Court which resulted into acquittal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit as under: i) Issuance of cheque by the respondent is not in dispute and as per Sections 118 and 139 of the Act, 1881 unless contrary is proved it shall be presumed that negotiable instrument has been issued for consideration and complainant is holder of the cheque in due course. ii As per version of the respondent, he borrowed Rs.4,00,000/- from the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of the evidence and the same is not liable to be interfered while invoking the jurisdiction of the appeal. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record of the court below in which impugned judgment is passed. 6. Section 118 of the Act, 1881 reads as under :118 Presumptions as to negotiable instruments. Until the contrary is proved, the following presumptions shall be made: ( a) of consideration that every negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration, and that every such instrument, when it has been accepted, endorsed, negotiated or transferred, was accepted, endorsed, negotiated or transferred for consideration; (b) as to date that every negotiable instrument bearing a date was made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ishonoured for insufficient fund. The cheque was issued by the Bank of Baroda in the present case and it was submitted before the same Bank. The purpose of enactment of the Act, 1881 is to maintain confidence of Bank transactions. 10. Looking to the evidence of both sides, it is clearly established that the cheque was issued to clear the liability of the year 2005 and therefore, argument advanced on behalf of the respondent regarding no transaction took place between the parties after 2003 is not sustainable. Again, cheque is presented before same Bank which issued the cheque and it is not a case where any manipulation is done in the said cheque. When even after notice the respondent did not pay the amount, the appellant had no option bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
