TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the plaintiff proved execution of the promissory note and passing of consideration, and whether the defendant successfully displaced the statutory presumption by showing forgery, material alteration, suspicious circumstances, or any legal infirmity in the document.
Analysis: In a suit based on a negotiable instrument, the plaintiff must establish execution, after which the presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operates in favour of consideration. The plaintiff's testimony as to the loan transaction and execution of the promissory note was corroborated by the attesting witness. The defendant's case of forgery was not supported by reliable contemporaneous materials, and he did not produce adequate admitted signatures for comparison. The circumstances relied on by the defendant were insufficient to dislodge the plaintiff's proof, and the courts below were justified in accepting the execution of the promissory note. The reliance placed on signature comparison also supported the finding that the defendant had not established his defence.
Conclusion: The plaintiff proved execution of the promissory note and consideration, and the defendant failed to rebut the presumption or establish forgery or material alteration. The findings in favour of the plaintiff were upheld.
TaxTMI 
