https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427319 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, emphasizing that the evidence of a hand-writing expert would be immaterial in determining the purpose for which the cheque was handed over. The court highlighted that even if details in the cheque are filled by someone other than the drawer, it does not affect the liability unless proven otherwise. The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the standard of proof required is that of a "preponderance of probabilities." The report of a hand-writing expert alone cannot rebut the presumption arising from the signing of the cheque. en-us Tue, 16 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Sep 2022 06:45:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427319 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, emphasizing that the evidence of a hand-writing expert would be immaterial in determining the purpose for which the cheque was handed over. The court highlighted that even if details in the cheque are filled by someone other than the drawer, it does not affect the liability unless proven otherwise. The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the standard of proof required is that of a "preponderance of probabilities." The report of a hand-writing expert alone cannot rebut the presumption arising from the signing of the cheque. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 16 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427319