We have been sugesting that if contested properly you can win in the court since the opponent makes many mistakes and your advocate does do not make proper efforts to use them for your benefit.
Under this thread we will discuss case laws of various lower courts and will suggest what should have been done and what can be done even now.
At Bangalore in cheque case on 28th April 2017 one sayad Ishaq has been covicted due to following reasons among others.
1) The service of notice is presumed and
2) The legal liability is presumed since there is signature of accused on invoice for current dues and previous dues.
WHAT WENT WRONG - LAPSES OF DEFENSE.
1) Most the advocates contest on the point that statutory notice was not recieved. This is most fatal defense.
In this case also by clever cross it could have been proved that NOTICE WAS NOT SENT AT ALL and hence no question of statutory presumption.
It is there in the complaint, it has to be read properly and clever questions have to be framed in cross.
2) Second in the liability of the accused is presumed by signature on the invoice.
Here again clever cross was enough. It is not essential for accused to admit his signature. The complainant must prove when and where such signature was put by the accused and who was witness.
