https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295284 Notice of demand under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was duly served where it was dispatched to the correct address by prepaid post and the acknowledgment card bore the accused's signature, attracting the presumptions under section 114 of the Evidence Act and section 27 of the General Clauses Act. The accused did not rebut the section 139 presumption because the admitted signature and transaction, coupled with an improbable defence of coercion and misuse, were insufficient on a preponderance of probabilities. Filling in cheque particulars by someone other than the drawer did not take the case outside section 138, as a blank signed cheque carries implied authority to complete details and the statutory presumption remains unaffected. Conviction was restored. en-us Fri, 04 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 May 2021 12:21:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295284 Notice of demand under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was duly served where it was dispatched to the correct address by prepaid post and the acknowledgment card bore the accused's signature, attracting the presumptions under section 114 of the Evidence Act and section 27 of the General Clauses Act. The accused did not rebut the section 139 presumption because the admitted signature and transaction, coupled with an improbable defence of coercion and misuse, were insufficient on a preponderance of probabilities. Filling in cheque particulars by someone other than the drawer did not take the case outside section 138, as a blank signed cheque carries implied authority to complete details and the statutory presumption remains unaffected. Conviction was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295284