Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Presumption of service of a statutory demand notice was not upheld where the postal endorsement of the addressee being absent for seven days, without more, did not prove deemed service and the complainant led no further evidence to dislodge the defence of absence due to illness at home. The court also held that the statutory presumption under Section 139 was rebutted on a preponderance of probabilities because the alleged loan transaction was not reliably proved: the date of advance was unspecified, no written agreement existed, and the defence that the cheques related to a chit-fund business was found probable. Section 138 was therefore not attracted and the acquittal was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.