https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309262 A signed cheque later completed by the complainant was not treated as a material alteration where the record showed no proof of filling contrary to instructions or without authority; implied authority was recognised, so Section 87 of the Negotiable Instruments Act did not invalidate the cheque. Once execution was admitted, presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 arose that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of debt or liability. The accused's inconsistent repayment defence and absence of reliable proof failed to rebut those presumptions on a preponderance of probabilities, and liability under Section 138 was treated as proved. en-us Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Aug 2023 16:22:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309262 A signed cheque later completed by the complainant was not treated as a material alteration where the record showed no proof of filling contrary to instructions or without authority; implied authority was recognised, so Section 87 of the Negotiable Instruments Act did not invalidate the cheque. Once execution was admitted, presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 arose that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of debt or liability. The accused's inconsistent repayment defence and absence of reliable proof failed to rebut those presumptions on a preponderance of probabilities, and liability under Section 138 was treated as proved. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309262