https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424012 Execution of the promissory note was proved by visual comparison of the disputed signature with admitted signatures under Section 73 of the Evidence Act. Once execution was established, the statutory presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act arose that the instrument was for consideration and executed on the stated date. That presumption was rebuttable, but the defendant failed to show a probable defence or disprove consideration on a preponderance of probabilities. The antecedent documents and endorsements indicated outstanding liability, so the plaintiff proved execution and consideration and was entitled to the decree for the suit claim. en-us Tue, 07 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:54:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424012 Execution of the promissory note was proved by visual comparison of the disputed signature with admitted signatures under Section 73 of the Evidence Act. Once execution was established, the statutory presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act arose that the instrument was for consideration and executed on the stated date. That presumption was rebuttable, but the defendant failed to show a probable defence or disprove consideration on a preponderance of probabilities. The antecedent documents and endorsements indicated outstanding liability, so the plaintiff proved execution and consideration and was entitled to the decree for the suit claim. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 07 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424012