NDLI: Tedhi Singh Vs. Narayan Dass Mahant

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	1881: s.139 – Presumption in favour of holder Negotiable Instrument Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881: s.139 – Presumption in favour of holder – Respondent filed complaint stating that appellant was his friend and as he was in urgent need of money, he gave a sum of Rs.7 lakhs – However, cheque given by the appellant was dishonored – Conviction of appellant u/s.138 – Held: s.139 of the N.I. Act provides that Court shall presume that the holder of a cheque received the cheque of the nature referred to in s.138 for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability – However, it is open to the accused to establish that there is no consideration received – It is in the context of this provision that the theory of ‘probable defence’ has grown – The accused is not expected to discharge an unduly high standard of proof – All that the accused needs to establish is a probable defence which is a matter to be decided on the facts of each case – U/s.138, the complainant need not show in the first instance that he had the financial capacity – At the time, when the complainant gives his evidence, unless a case is set up in the reply notice to the statutory notice sent that the complainant did not have the wherewithal, it cannot be expected of the complainant to initially lead evidence to show that he had the financial capacity – However, the accused has a right to demonstrate that the complainant in a particular case did not have the capacity which can be done by producing independent materials, namely, by examining his witnesses and producing documents – It can also be established by pointing to the materials produced by the complainant himself and cross examination of the witnesses of the complainant – In this case, in reply notice appellant did not set up that the complainant did not have the financial capacity to advance the loan – Moreover, no reference was made by the appellant of the complaint of lost cheque book or signed cheque leaf – No evidence was led to establish that the appellant had informed the Bank about the loss of cheque book containing blank cheque – In totality of facts, appellant has not been able to establish a case of interference with the finding of courts below that the offence under s.138 was committed by the appellant – Thus, conviction u/s.138 N.I Act upheld – However, sentence of one year imprisonment substituted with fine. Constitution of India: Art.136 – Power of Supreme Court to interfere – Art.136 of the Constitution only confers a right to obtain special leave in rare and extraordinary cases – While exercising power under Art.136, the Court may not refuse to interfere in a case where three Courts have gone completely wrong – It is not to be understood as meaning that it is a clear case of even three Courts in unison falling into palpable error and thereby causing miscarriage of justice and yet this Court would not interfere.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 272
Petitioner	Tedhi Singh
Respondent	Narayan Dass Mahant
SCR	[2022] 4 S.C.R. 442
Judgement Date	2022-03-07
Case Number	362

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Tedhi Singh Vs. Narayan Dass Mahant

Please Log-in to view this content

Uttam Ram Vs. Devinder Singh Hudan & Anr.

Kishan Rao Vs. Shankargouda

Rohitbhai Jivanlal Patel Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr.

Sri Dattatraya Vs. Sharanappa

T.p. Murugan (dead) Thr. Lrs. Vs. Bojan

M/s. Kumar Exports Vs. M/s. Sharma Carpets

Bir Singh Vs. Mukesh Kumar

T. Vasanthakumar Vs. Vijayakumari

Rajesh Jain Vs. Ajay Singh

Tedhi Singh Vs. Narayan Dass Mahant

Tedhi Singh Vs. Narayan Dass Mahant

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Uttam Ram Vs. Devinder Singh Hudan & Anr.

Kishan Rao Vs. Shankargouda

Rohitbhai Jivanlal Patel Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr.

Sri Dattatraya Vs. Sharanappa

T.p. Murugan (dead) Thr. Lrs. Vs. Bojan

M/s. Kumar Exports Vs. M/s. Sharma Carpets

Bir Singh Vs. Mukesh Kumar

T. Vasanthakumar Vs. Vijayakumari

Rajesh Jain Vs. Ajay Singh

Tedhi Singh Vs. Narayan Dass Mahant