https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301882 Presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the cheque holder where the accused failed to raise a probable defence. The admitted sale agreement, issuance of cheques towards refund of advance, dishonour of the cheques, statutory demand, and the reply seeking time to pay supported the complainant's case. The concurrent findings were neither perverse nor illegal, so the conviction under Section 138 was sustained and no interference in revision was warranted. en-us Wed, 01 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:52:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301882 Presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the cheque holder where the accused failed to raise a probable defence. The admitted sale agreement, issuance of cheques towards refund of advance, dishonour of the cheques, statutory demand, and the reply seeking time to pay supported the complainant's case. The concurrent findings were neither perverse nor illegal, so the conviction under Section 138 was sustained and no interference in revision was warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301882