https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402846 Dishonour of a cheque issued as security under a loan-cum-hypothecation arrangement was treated as attracting Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 where the accused admitted signature and issuance, thereby triggering the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139. The accused failed to rebut those presumptions, as no evidence was led and the defence remained unsupported beyond cross-examination suggestions. A continuing security clause was held to preserve liability despite partial payments, repossession, or sale of the vehicle, and the trial court's insistence on proof of full loan adjustment was found unsustainable. The conviction was therefore warranted. en-us Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jan 2021 11:04:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402846 Dishonour of a cheque issued as security under a loan-cum-hypothecation arrangement was treated as attracting Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 where the accused admitted signature and issuance, thereby triggering the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139. The accused failed to rebut those presumptions, as no evidence was led and the defence remained unsupported beyond cross-examination suggestions. A continuing security clause was held to preserve liability despite partial payments, repossession, or sale of the vehicle, and the trial court's insistence on proof of full loan adjustment was found unsustainable. The conviction was therefore warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402846