https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408096 Refusal of a properly addressed demand notice, together with failure to pay after summons, was treated as sufficient compliance with the statutory notice requirement under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The defence of no financial capacity and absence of legally enforceable debt failed because it was unsupported by evidence, was not raised at the earliest stage, and the statutory presumption in favour of the complainant remained unrebutted; the conviction was therefore upheld. On sentence, the Court found the punishment excessive in the facts of the case and modified only the quantum of fine on proportionality grounds, leaving the finding of guilt intact. en-us Fri, 23 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 May 2021 08:36:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408096 Refusal of a properly addressed demand notice, together with failure to pay after summons, was treated as sufficient compliance with the statutory notice requirement under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The defence of no financial capacity and absence of legally enforceable debt failed because it was unsupported by evidence, was not raised at the earliest stage, and the statutory presumption in favour of the complainant remained unrebutted; the conviction was therefore upheld. On sentence, the Court found the punishment excessive in the facts of the case and modified only the quantum of fine on proportionality grounds, leaving the finding of guilt intact. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 23 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408096