https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257923 In a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the statutory presumption under Section 139 was held rebutted where the complaint lacked particulars of the alleged cash advance, supporting documents, witnesses, or proof of source and mode of payment. The Court also noted a material inconsistency between the asserted personal loan and the fact that the cheques were issued in favour of the complainants' firm. On the defence evidence relating to lease and connected transactions, the complainants failed to prove a legally recoverable liability, and special leave to appeal against the acquittal was refused, leaving the acquittal undisturbed. en-us Thu, 05 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Mar 2015 06:15:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257923 In a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the statutory presumption under Section 139 was held rebutted where the complaint lacked particulars of the alleged cash advance, supporting documents, witnesses, or proof of source and mode of payment. The Court also noted a material inconsistency between the asserted personal loan and the fact that the cheques were issued in favour of the complainants' firm. On the defence evidence relating to lease and connected transactions, the complainants failed to prove a legally recoverable liability, and special leave to appeal against the acquittal was refused, leaving the acquittal undisturbed. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 05 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257923