Are you tired of being held liable for dishonored cheques? Do you want to know the secret to rebutting the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act? Look no further!
In this article, we will reveal the strategies and evidence you need to prove that the cheque was not genuine or valid. Say goodbye to unnecessary legal troubles and financial liability!
Understanding Section 139
Before we dive into the strategies, let’s understand the presumption under Section 139. This section states that a cheque is presumed to be genuine and valid unless the contrary is proved. This means that the burden of proof is on the defendant (drawer of the cheque) to prove that the cheque was not issued by them or was tampered with.
The Importance of Rebutting the Presumption
Rebutting the presumption under Section 139 is crucial because it can help you avoid legal liability and financial loss. If you are able to prove that the cheque was not genuine or valid, you can avoid paying damages or facing criminal charges.
Strategies to Rebut the Presumption
Here are the strategies and evidence you need to rebut the presumption:
Proof of Forgery: Show that the cheque was forged or tampered with, and the signature was not genuine. You can use expert evidence, such as a handwriting expert or a forensic expert, to prove that the signature was forged.
Lack of Funds: Prove that there were insufficient funds in the account to cover the amount of the cheque. You can use bank statements and records to show that the account was empty or had insufficient funds.
Unauthorized Signature: Show that the signature on the cheque was unauthorized or made without the drawer’s consent. You can use evidence, such as a letter or a document, to prove that the signature was unauthorized.
Altered Cheque: Prove that the cheque was altered or tampered with after it was drawn. You can use expert evidence to show that the cheque was altered or tampered with.
Payment Made: Show that the amount of the cheque was paid by another mode, such as cash or electronic transfer. You can use receipts or bank statements to prove that the payment was made.
Cheque Not Presented: Prove that the cheque was not presented to the bank for payment. You can use bank records to show that the cheque was not presented.
Drawer’s Denial: Show that the drawer denied the issuance of the cheque or the signature thereon. You can use a statement or affidavit from the drawer to prove that they denied issuing the cheque.
Expert Evidence: Produce expert evidence, such as a handwriting expert or a forensic expert, to prove that the cheque was forged or tampered with.
Circumstantial Evidence: Provide circumstantial evidence to show that the cheque was not issued by the drawer. You can use evidence, such as a suspicious transaction history or a history of fraud, to prove that the cheque was not genuine.
Other Evidence: Produce any other evidence that can rebut the presumption. You can use evidence, such as a letter or a document, to prove that the cheque was not genuine or valid.
Conclusion
Rebutting the presumption under Section 139 is not an impossible task. By using the strategies and evidence mentioned above, you can prove that the cheque was not genuine or valid. Remember, the burden of proof is on the defendant, so make sure you have strong evidence to support your case. Don’t let a dishonored cheque ruin your reputation and finances! Take control of your legal defense today!