Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 2008 (5) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (5) TMI 630 - SC - Companies LawWhether in the absence of any rebuttal by the respondents to the fact that the promissory note was for consideration as required, which gave rise to the presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the courts below were justified in holding that since the appellant had given evidence inconsistent with such presumption, no decree could be passed on the basis of such presumption? Held that:- The mere denial, if there be any, by the respondents that no consideration had passed would not have been sufficient and something probable had to be brought on record to prove the non-existence of consideration. In this view of the matter, we are, therefore, of the view that once the execution of the pronote has been proved, the appellant would be entitled to the benefit of the presumption under Section 118(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act because the respondents had failed to discharge the initial burden and therefore, the High Court was in error in appreciating the evidence of the appellant to come to the conclusion that since such evidence was inconsistent with the pronote being Ex.A-21, the appellant could not be given the benefit of the presumption. Appeal is allowed and the judgments of the courts below are, therefore, modified to the extent that the suit of the appellant must stand decreed in its entirety.
|