<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Cheque dishonour conviction upheld as accused fails to rebut Section 139 presumption of legally enforceable debt</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89595</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the revision petition in a dishonoured cheque case under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused issued a cheque for Rs.2,63,216 which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 139 that the cheque was issued for discharge of legally enforceable debt. His defence that the cheque was blank and unsigned when given was rejected as improbable. The trial court&#039;s conviction was upheld as the accused failed to prove non-service of demand notice and did not pay the amount after deemed service. The compensation of Rs.4,80,000 awarded by the trial court, including interest and litigation costs over seven years, was deemed reasonable and not excessive, requiring no interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:34:57 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:35:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=830425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Cheque dishonour conviction upheld as accused fails to rebut Section 139 presumption of legally enforceable debt</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89595</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the revision petition in a dishonoured cheque case under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused issued a cheque for Rs.2,63,216 which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 139 that the cheque was issued for discharge of legally enforceable debt. His defence that the cheque was blank and unsigned when given was rejected as improbable. The trial court&#039;s conviction was upheld as the accused failed to prove non-service of demand notice and did not pay the amount after deemed service. The compensation of Rs.4,80,000 awarded by the trial court, including interest and litigation costs over seven years, was deemed reasonable and not excessive, requiring no interference.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:34:57 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89595</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>