https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363320 Where the drawer admitted the cheque and signature, the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act remained intact because the defence version of loss of the cheque was unsupported by any immediate police complaint, stop-payment instruction, or other credible rebuttal material. The dishonour memo showing insufficiency of funds supported liability, and the conviction under Section 138 was restored. Non-examination of the complainant did not justify an adverse inference because the power of attorney was proved, the agent gave evidence from personal knowledge, and the complainant had explained his inability to appear personally. en-us Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2018 07:43:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363320 Where the drawer admitted the cheque and signature, the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act remained intact because the defence version of loss of the cheque was unsupported by any immediate police complaint, stop-payment instruction, or other credible rebuttal material. The dishonour memo showing insufficiency of funds supported liability, and the conviction under Section 138 was restored. Non-examination of the complainant did not justify an adverse inference because the power of attorney was proved, the agent gave evidence from personal knowledge, and the complainant had explained his inability to appear personally. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363320