https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783836 In cheque dishonour proceedings, once execution of the cheque and its dishonour are proved, the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operate in favour of the complainant, and the accused must rebut them by a probable defence on the preponderance of probabilities. A bare denial is insufficient. The complainant was not required to prove financial capacity because no timely foundational challenge was raised in reply to the statutory notice. Dispatch of notice to the correct address by registered post attracted the presumption of service, and statutory notice was treated as duly complied with. en-us Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Dec 2025 07:51:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783836 In cheque dishonour proceedings, once execution of the cheque and its dishonour are proved, the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operate in favour of the complainant, and the accused must rebut them by a probable defence on the preponderance of probabilities. A bare denial is insufficient. The complainant was not required to prove financial capacity because no timely foundational challenge was raised in reply to the statutory notice. Dispatch of notice to the correct address by registered post attracted the presumption of service, and statutory notice was treated as duly complied with. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783836