https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416634 Admission of signature on the cheque, together with proof of the underlying transactions, triggered the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in favour of the complainant. The defence that the cheque was taken as security in chitty dealings and later misused was not supported by evidence sufficient to rebut those presumptions. The absence of the exact cheque amount in the account statements did not defeat the claim where the cheque reflected the aggregate liability arising from the parties' transactions. The cheque was therefore treated as issued in discharge of a legally enforceable liability, and liability under Section 138 was made out. en-us Sat, 04 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Jan 2022 07:22:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416634 Admission of signature on the cheque, together with proof of the underlying transactions, triggered the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in favour of the complainant. The defence that the cheque was taken as security in chitty dealings and later misused was not supported by evidence sufficient to rebut those presumptions. The absence of the exact cheque amount in the account statements did not defeat the claim where the cheque reflected the aggregate liability arising from the parties' transactions. The cheque was therefore treated as issued in discharge of a legally enforceable liability, and liability under Section 138 was made out. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 04 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416634