1999 Supp1 BomCR 87 ; 1999 1 SCC 113
(SUPREME COURT)
M.K. Mukherjee S.S.M. Quadri, JJ.
Maruti Udyog Ltd. .... Appellant.
Versus
Narender others .... Respondents.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 706-715 of 1998 (Arising out of SLPs (Cri.) Nos. 465, 473, 466, 469, 467, 470, 471, 475, 477 486 of 1998), decided on 24-7-1998.
Under section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a presumption must be drawn that the holder of the cheque received the cheque for the discharge of any debit or other liability unless the contrary is proved.
Act Referred :NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT : S.139
Presumption - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - The court held that under section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a presumption must be drawn that the holder of the cheque received the cheque for the discharge of any debit or other liability unless the contrary is proved.
Fact of the Case:
The High Court entertained and accepted the plea of the accused-respondent at the initial stage of the proceedings and quashed the complaints filed by the appellant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the High Court was not justified in quashing the complaints and directed the trial Court to proceed with the complaints in accordance with law.
Issues: Interpretation of section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Ratio Decidendi: The presumption under section 139 of the Act must be drawn unless the contrary is proved.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, the impugned orders of the High Court were set aside, and the trial Court was directed to proceed with the complaints in accordance with law.
Presumption - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - The court held that under section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a presumption must be drawn that the holder of the cheque received the cheque for the discharge of any debit or other liability unless the contrary is proved.
Fact of the Case:
The High Court entertained and accepted the plea of the accused-respondent at the initial stage of the proceedings and quashed the complaints filed by the appellant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the High Court was not justified in quashing the complaints and directed the trial Court to proceed with the complaints in accordance with law.
Issues: Interpretation of section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Ratio Decidendi: The presumption under section 139 of the Act must be drawn unless the contrary is proved.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, the impugned orders of the High Court were set aside, and the trial Court was directed to proceed with the complaints in accordance with law.
ORDER: Leave granted in the petitions.
2. In view of the express provision of section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, a presumption must be drawn that the holder of the cheque received the cheque, of the nature referred to in section 138, for the discharge of any debit or other liability unless the contrary is proved. Therefore, the High Court was not justified in entertaining and accepting the plea of the accused-respondent at the initial stage of the proceedings and quashing the complaints filed by the appellant. We, therefore, allow these appeals, set aside the impugned orders of the High Court and direct the trial Court to proceed with the complaints in accordance with law.
-----