https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193633 Admission of the cheque and signatures triggered the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, placing the burden on the accused to rebut liability with probable evidence. Mere denial in a reply notice or cross-examination was treated as insufficient, and the trial court was criticised for misapplying the reverse onus. On the facts, the presumption was held unrebutted and liability under Section 138 was sustained against respondents 1 to 3. Separately, respondents 4 to 6 were found to have ceased as partners before the transaction, so vicarious liability could not be fastened on them. en-us Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:37:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193633 Admission of the cheque and signatures triggered the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, placing the burden on the accused to rebut liability with probable evidence. Mere denial in a reply notice or cross-examination was treated as insufficient, and the trial court was criticised for misapplying the reverse onus. On the facts, the presumption was held unrebutted and liability under Section 138 was sustained against respondents 1 to 3. Separately, respondents 4 to 6 were found to have ceased as partners before the transaction, so vicarious liability could not be fastened on them. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193633