https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448267 Once the drawer admitted the cheque signature, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the complainant, and the accused had to rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities. The defence that the cheque was only a security cheque, that the complainant lacked financial capacity, and that notice was not received failed because the explanation was found inherently improbable, the dishonour memo was supported by the Section 146 presumption, and service of notice was presumed when sent by registered post to the correct address. A security cheque still attracts Section 138 when it represents an enforceable liability. Conviction and sentence were upheld. en-us Thu, 11 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:32:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448267 Once the drawer admitted the cheque signature, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the complainant, and the accused had to rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities. The defence that the cheque was only a security cheque, that the complainant lacked financial capacity, and that notice was not received failed because the explanation was found inherently improbable, the dishonour memo was supported by the Section 146 presumption, and service of notice was presumed when sent by registered post to the correct address. A security cheque still attracts Section 138 when it represents an enforceable liability. Conviction and sentence were upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 11 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448267