SUMETI VIJ versus M/S PARAMOUNT TECH FAB INDUSTRIES

SUMETI VIJ versus M/S PARAMOUNT TECH FAB INDUSTRIES

The High Court correctly convicted the appellant under Section 138 NI Act because the complainant proved supply of goods, issuance and dishonour of cheques and service of statutory notices, and the appellant failed to adduce any evidence to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 139; the Section 313 statement alone is not substantive defence.

Parties
Appellant: Sumeti Vij; Respondent: M/s Paramount Tech Fab Industries
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court Judgment Dated 30 04 2019
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 138 NI Act, Section 139 NI Act, Section 313 Cr PC, Presumption of Consideration, Dishonour of Cheque
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Criminal Law Evidence Section 138 NI Act Section 139 NI Act Section 313 Cr PC Presumption of Consideration Dishonour of Cheque

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sumeti Vij

Appellant

M/s Paramount Tech Fab Industries

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court Judgment Dated 30 04 2019

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complainant proved delivery of goods and issuance of cheques in discharge of liability
  2. 2 Whether presumption under Section 139 NI Act was rebutted by the accused
  3. 3 Standard and burden of proof applicable in proceedings under Section 138 NI Act

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court correctly convicted the appellant under Section 138 NI Act because the complainant proved supply of goods, issuance and dishonour of cheques and service of statutory notices, and the appellant failed to adduce any evidence to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 139; the Section 313 statement alone is not substantive defence.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Bail bonds cancelled