https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774208 Admission of cheque signatures triggered the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, but those presumptions remained rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities. The complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt because no investment records, account trail, or other corroboration supported the alleged advance, while the surrounding evidence favoured the respondent's version of a smaller loan that had been repaid. A civil decree obtained after failure to comply with a condition for leave to defend was not treated as conclusive proof of liability in the criminal complaint, and the acquittal was upheld. en-us Sat, 28 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Jul 2025 08:47:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774208 Admission of cheque signatures triggered the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, but those presumptions remained rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities. The complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt because no investment records, account trail, or other corroboration supported the alleged advance, while the surrounding evidence favoured the respondent's version of a smaller loan that had been repaid. A civil decree obtained after failure to comply with a condition for leave to defend was not treated as conclusive proof of liability in the criminal complaint, and the acquittal was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 28 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774208