138n.i.act,produce photocopy only ledger
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 28 February 2010
This query is : Resolved
138 n.i.act ke vad main ek dukandar ne case kiya hai ki usne alag alag billo main,mal becha,jisme final hisab kar use 90000 ka chek mila, usne cross main bill book,ledger book,recipt book va income tax return file karna accept kiya,kintu parivad ke sath keval ledger ki photo copy file kari, ledger ka hisab bhi 90405 ka hai, 405 ka koi jikra nahi, my question......... kya usse 91 ka aavedan dekar mool ledger,bill book, receipt book ki mang ki jave, ya na kiya jave,.......... yadi vah proper book khud nahi pesh karege to accused ko kya benifit hai
Parveen Kr. Aggarwal
(Expert) 28 February 2010
Yadi complainant ne yah mana hai ki vaha apne khate maintain karta hai or phir bhi adalat mein pesh nahi karta hai to uske khilaf adverse inference draw kiya jaa sakta hai. Dhara 114 Evidence Act ke tahat.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 28 February 2010
aapke prashan ka ootar hai ki aapko mangna chahiye. jaisa ki aapne btaya ki 405 ke hisab ka koi jikar nahi hai aur bhi kafi gadbad mil sakti hain so aapko manana chahiye aur agar nahi lata to nishchit hi iska labh parivadi ko milega.
N RAMESH.
(Expert) 01 March 2010
138 ke case mein, jimmedari accused ke upar hai. dukandar koi books and accounts pesh na karega to bhi, accused ko koi benefit nahi milega.
Parveen Kr. Aggarwal
(Expert) 01 March 2010
Mr. N. Ramesh,
Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 raises a presumption only to the effect that the cheque was issued in discharge of liability but there is no presumption with regard to existence of liability. So, the burden to prove existence of a debt or legally enforceable liability still rests on the complainant.
Adinath@Avinash Patil
(Expert) 01 March 2010
The burden of legaly enforceable existing libility is on complainant.If complainanat is not ready to produce original extracts of khata,photo copy of extracts will not go evidence. It is duty of complainant to produce not only kha extracts he must file all other relevant documents of day to day chalans because coplainant is not banking/financial institution.At present situation accused should not ask to produce those ledger or any documents accuse can rebut presumption on conduct of complainant.If the cheque amount is more than actuals accused have good case.
PJANARDHANA REDDY
(Expert) 01 March 2010
NI ACT CASES OF PRIVATE FINANCIERS GOT STRUCK DOWN BY THE COURTS BECAUSE THE MOSTLY EMPTY BLANK SIGNED CHQS WERE FILLED AND DISHONOURED AND FILLING CASE.
THEY CONNOT PROVE ANY RELEVANT VOUCHER/BANK DRAWAL OR CHQ PAYMENT TO ACCUSED AT THE DATE WHAT THEY MENTIONED IN COMPLAINT.
THIS IS THE BIG PROBLEM IN POSTDATED CHQS IN NI ACT CASES.
Guest
(Expert) 01 March 2010
i agree with Mr Adinath
