https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442308 A loan advanced against a receipt and cheques was treated as a loan transaction, not as the carrying on of an unlicensed money-lending business merely because the lender lacked a licence. The Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946 was applied as a bar to civil recovery decrees, not as a defence to prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Where cheque issuance, dishonour, service of notice, and the statutory presumption under Section 139 are established, the accused must rebut the legally recoverable debt with evidence; a bare plea of repayment is insufficient. The result is that cheque dishonour liability can be proved notwithstanding the money-lending objection. en-us Wed, 09 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Sep 2023 11:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442308 A loan advanced against a receipt and cheques was treated as a loan transaction, not as the carrying on of an unlicensed money-lending business merely because the lender lacked a licence. The Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946 was applied as a bar to civil recovery decrees, not as a defence to prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Where cheque issuance, dishonour, service of notice, and the statutory presumption under Section 139 are established, the accused must rebut the legally recoverable debt with evidence; a bare plea of repayment is insufficient. The result is that cheque dishonour liability can be proved notwithstanding the money-lending objection. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442308