https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311760 A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was held not liable to quashing at the threshold under Section 482 CrPC merely because the cheque was alleged to have been issued for a time-barred debt. The complaint disclosed dishonour, statutory notice and non-payment, which attracted the presumption that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable liability. That presumption is rebuttable, but only through evidence. The question whether the underlying debt was time-barred could not be conclusively decided on the quashing material and was left for trial, as limitation in such matters may involve a mixed question of law and fact. en-us Fri, 11 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jan 2024 08:42:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311760 A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was held not liable to quashing at the threshold under Section 482 CrPC merely because the cheque was alleged to have been issued for a time-barred debt. The complaint disclosed dishonour, statutory notice and non-payment, which attracted the presumption that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable liability. That presumption is rebuttable, but only through evidence. The question whether the underlying debt was time-barred could not be conclusively decided on the quashing material and was left for trial, as limitation in such matters may involve a mixed question of law and fact. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311760