<?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 (11) TMI 939 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415158</link>
    <description>A signed cheque raises a rebuttable presumption of legally enforceable liability under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and that presumption is displaced only by credible evidence. The accused admitted his signatures but failed to support the claim that the cheque was issued merely as security, with no reliable proof of repayment, no complaint of misuse or non-return, and defence evidence found inconsistent. Even if treated as a security cheque, it can still attract Section 138 where the underlying liability remains unpaid. The conviction and sentence under Section 138 were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2021 08:57:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=662263" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (11) TMI 939 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415158</link>
      <description>A signed cheque raises a rebuttable presumption of legally enforceable liability under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and that presumption is displaced only by credible evidence. The accused admitted his signatures but failed to support the claim that the cheque was issued merely as security, with no reliable proof of repayment, no complaint of misuse or non-return, and defence evidence found inconsistent. Even if treated as a security cheque, it can still attract Section 138 where the underlying liability remains unpaid. The conviction and sentence under Section 138 were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415158</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>