Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2021 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (6) TMI 550 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - legally enforceable debt or the liability or not - rebuttal of presumption - HELD THAT:- In a recent decision delivered in a case of T.P. Murugan vs. Bojan 2018 (8) TMI 35 - SUPREME COURT, the Apex Court succinctly held that the moment the cheque is signed and issued in favour of a holder, under Section 139 of the Act raises a statutory presumption on the discharge of a legally enforceable debt. What emerged from the aforesaid decision is that Section 139 of the Act raises a statutory presumption in favour of the holder of the negotiable instrument in discharge of the debt or other liability though it may not in all conceivable circumstances be in discharge of the legally enforceable debt or other liability and, therefore, depends upon the special facts involved in the given case. Even if the statutory presumption is raised by use of the word "shall presume", it does not take away the right of a person against whom the same is presumed to rebut the same. It is, thus, a rebuttable presumption as in a case of an ordinary presumption - However, the degree of evidence in rebuttal varies as in case of a statutory presumption, the accused has to lead the case which appears to be probable, plausible and reasonable from a prudent man which may not be so strict in case of a rebuttal of an ordinary presumption. Admittedly, the cheques, on being presented, were dishonoured with the remark "exceeds arrangement" meaning thereby there were no sufficient balance therein to cover the said amount and, therefore, it satisfies the ingredients of Section 138 of the Act - The evidence of rebuttal is neither probable nor plausible in the perspective of a prudent man and I am, therefore, amazed how the learned Magistrate have found fault into such transactions. Appeal allowed.
|