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

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (2) TMI 1421

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r transferred for consideration. Thus, the burden is on the accused to rebut such presumption. The accused had rebutted such presumption in the cross-examination of the complainant when he appeared as CW-1. Such presumption was rebutted by putting questions to the complainant and explaining the circumstances under section 313 CrPC. A perusal of the cross-examination reveals that the complainant admitted that he filled the cheque in his hand, and after that, the accused had put his signatures - the burden was primarily on the complainant to prove the debt amount. It was incumbent upon the complainant to tender in evidence some accounts, ledger, statement, or paper on record whatsoever, but he did not do so. He was silent about the loans b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal under Section 378(4) CrPC. 2. The complaint and the annexures attached reveal a cheque (Ex.CW-1/A) which was drawn in favor of the complainant-applicant Rajesh Jain for Rs.6,95,204/- dated 19.10.2017 was dishonored due to insufficient funds. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 26.10.2017 (Ex.CW-1/D) to the respondent-accused through his counsel and proved the postal receipt dated 28.10.2017 (Ex.CW-1/E). The legal notice was sent after the statutory period of fifteen days. On non-receipt of money, despite demand notice, the applicant filed a complaint under Section 138 (a)(b)(c) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NIA) against the respondent-accused. 3. It shall be appropriate to extract paragraph 2 of the Legal Not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in, the complainant explained that the accused had taken a loan on various dates starting from 01.03.2014. He did admit that he had not mentioned the dates and particulars of the loans in his complaint, legal notice, an affidavit. The complainant admitted in his cross-examination that he had filled up the cheque with his hand in the presence of the accused. After that, the accused had put his signatures on the cheque. The complainant also admitted that in the legal notice, it was mentioned that he had issued a post-dated cheque. However, he has explained that it was a typographical error. The complainant also admitted during his cross-examination as CW-1 that he had not made any pronote about the loan. He stated that the loan was given on t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t he had given a friendly loan on interest, but by charging interest, the complainant became a lender and violated the provisions of The Punjab Registration of Money-lender s Act 1938, which was applied to the State of Haryana through Adaptation of Law Order, 1968. Section 4(2) of the Punjab Registration of Money-lender s Act stipulates that no money lenders shall carry on the business of advancing loans unless he gets himself registered under the Act, and any infringement thereof was a penal offence. The trial court held that, given the violation, the debt was not legally enforceable, and as such, it dismissed the complaint. 11. Aggrieved by the said dismissal of the complaint, the complainant-applicant came up before this Court by fili .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nant had given loans on various dates, he must have maintained some document qua that, because it was not a one-time loan but loan along with interest accrued on the principal, which made the amount to Rs.6,95,204/-. Thus, the burden was primarily on the complainant to prove the debt amount. It was incumbent upon the complainant to tender in evidence some accounts, ledger, statement, or paper on record whatsoever, but he did not do so. He was silent about the loans being advanced at multiple dates. On being cross-examined, he did admit that the loans were not given on any particular date but various dates. The stand of the accused was that he did take loans on various dates, but every month, the complainant would enhance the amount by one l .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates