https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397431 The Karnataka HC applied the Section 139 presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act after the cheque, dishonour for insufficiency of funds, and service of notice were established. The accused admitted the cheque and handwriting on the amount, but failed to prove the defence that the instrument had been issued to the complainant's father, so liability was not rebutted and guilt under Section 138 was upheld. The Court also found no illegality or perversity in the concurrent findings below, and held that the sentence was proportionate, so the conviction and sentence were not interfered with in revision. en-us Thu, 06 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Aug 2020 10:14:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397431 The Karnataka HC applied the Section 139 presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act after the cheque, dishonour for insufficiency of funds, and service of notice were established. The accused admitted the cheque and handwriting on the amount, but failed to prove the defence that the instrument had been issued to the complainant's father, so liability was not rebutted and guilt under Section 138 was upheld. The Court also found no illegality or perversity in the concurrent findings below, and held that the sentence was proportionate, so the conviction and sentence were not interfered with in revision. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 06 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397431