Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
The HC dismissed the revision petition challenging conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused admitted signing the dishonoured cheque but failed to rebut the statutory presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 that it was issued to discharge legal liability. The court held that even security cheques attract criminal liability when dishonoured. The accused's defence lacked credible evidence, and proper notice was served as evidenced by acknowledgment bearing his signatures. The trial court's compensation award of Rs. 3,44,000 (double the cheque amount) was upheld, considering eight-year litigation delay, interest loss, and legal expenses. The HC affirmed that revisional jurisdiction cannot reappreciate evidence absent patent illegality or perversity, upholding concurrent findings below.
The HC dismissed the revision petition challenging conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused admitted signing the dishonoured cheque but failed to rebut the statutory presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 that it was issued to discharge legal liability. The court held that even security cheques attract criminal liability when dishonoured. The accused's defence lacked credible evidence, and proper notice was served as evidenced by acknowledgment bearing his signatures. The trial court's compensation award of Rs. 3,44,000 (double the cheque amount) was upheld, considering eight-year litigation delay, interest loss, and legal expenses. The HC affirmed that revisional jurisdiction cannot reappreciate evidence absent patent illegality or perversity, upholding concurrent findings below.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.