<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (4) TMI 34 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405918</link>
    <description>Admission of the drawer&#039;s signature on a cheque attracts the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, even if the remaining entries were written by another hand or the cheque was filled up later, provided it was voluntarily signed and handed over. The accused must rebut those presumptions on a preponderance of probabilities, but inconsistent defence versions, unsupported claims of a blank security cheque, and absence of credible proof of repayment or discharge were insufficient. The presumptions therefore remained unrebutted, the ingredients of cheque dishonour were established, and the conviction was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2021 08:47:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=640505" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (4) TMI 34 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405918</link>
      <description>Admission of the drawer&#039;s signature on a cheque attracts the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, even if the remaining entries were written by another hand or the cheque was filled up later, provided it was voluntarily signed and handed over. The accused must rebut those presumptions on a preponderance of probabilities, but inconsistent defence versions, unsupported claims of a blank security cheque, and absence of credible proof of repayment or discharge were insufficient. The presumptions therefore remained unrebutted, the ingredients of cheque dishonour were established, and the conviction was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>