TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 555
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. They approached the plaintiff for the same. The plaintiff raised the required fund from his friends. An agreement was executed between plaintiff and the defendant's husband agreeing to repay the amount. On the failure of the defendant and her husband to pay off the liability, the plaintiff was constrained to discharge the liability. Thereafter, when the amount was demanded by the plaintiff, the defendant issued Ext.A1 cheque for Rs. 63,00,000/-. The cheque when presented for payment was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds in the account. It is accordingly that the suit was filed. 3. The defendant in her written statement admitted that the plaintiff and the defendant's husband were close friends and that both of them were empl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure thereon. That Ext.A1 cheque belongs to the defendant is not in dispute. According to her, she is unaware as to how the cheque happened to be in the possession of the plaintiff. 8. The plaintiff as PW1, has categorically deposed about the execution and issuance of Ext.A1 cheque by the defendant. He has asserted about the signing of the cheque by the defendant in his presence. There is no other witness, for such execution and issuance. Though in the written statement the defendant denied her signature in Ext.A1, no steps were taken by her to prove the said contention. Even in her proof affidavit (as DW1), she has not denied her signature in Ext.A1, though she did, in her cross-examination. When PW1 is cross examined there is no suggestio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s noticed earlier she has no explanation as to how her cheque happened to be with the plaintiff. Though the signature thereon is denied, no steps have been taken by her to prove the same. She has no case that Ext.A1 cheque was stolen by the plaintiff or anyone. She has no case that the cheque was lost from her possession. She had not countermanded payment of the cheque at the Bank. The cheque was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds. Though it is claimed that the liability under Ext.B2 agreement was discharged, there is no evidence to prove such discharge. 12. The learned counsel for the appellant would argue that, though the plaintiff claims that the cheque was issued after settling the accounts, no evidence regarding such settlement is....