https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157154 Section 118(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act creates a rebuttable presumption of consideration once execution of a promissory note is admitted or proved. The defendant can rebut it on a preponderance of probabilities by direct or circumstantial evidence, including material supporting an adverse inference under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. If the defendant fails to raise a probable defence, the statutory presumption remains with the plaintiff; after both sides lead evidence, the court must consider the entire record and the abstract burden of proof becomes less significant. On the stated facts, the defendant did not rebut the presumption and the plaintiff succeeded on the promissory note. A dissenting view held that the burden shifts only after the absence of consideration is established. en-us Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Oct 2025 16:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157154 Section 118(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act creates a rebuttable presumption of consideration once execution of a promissory note is admitted or proved. The defendant can rebut it on a preponderance of probabilities by direct or circumstantial evidence, including material supporting an adverse inference under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. If the defendant fails to raise a probable defence, the statutory presumption remains with the plaintiff; after both sides lead evidence, the court must consider the entire record and the abstract burden of proof becomes less significant. On the stated facts, the defendant did not rebut the presumption and the plaintiff succeeded on the promissory note. A dissenting view held that the burden shifts only after the absence of consideration is established. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157154