https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766868 The HC allowed the defendant's appeal in a promissory note suit. The plaintiff failed to establish passing of consideration despite the legal presumption under Section 118(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found inconsistencies in the plaintiff's case - he was an electrical contractor for the defendant's mill which had closed in 2013, yet claimed the promissory note was executed in 2014. Bank statements produced did not show actual withdrawal of funds to establish consideration. The defendant successfully rebutted the presumption by demonstrating improbable circumstances surrounding the transaction. The trial court's decree was set aside. en-us Mon, 10 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Mar 2025 07:35:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766868 The HC allowed the defendant's appeal in a promissory note suit. The plaintiff failed to establish passing of consideration despite the legal presumption under Section 118(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found inconsistencies in the plaintiff's case - he was an electrical contractor for the defendant's mill which had closed in 2013, yet claimed the promissory note was executed in 2014. Bank statements produced did not show actual withdrawal of funds to establish consideration. The defendant successfully rebutted the presumption by demonstrating improbable circumstances surrounding the transaction. The trial court's decree was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 10 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766868