LawRato

How to prove debt in a cheque bounce case ?


20-Mar-2023 (In Cheque Bounce Law)
Cheque Drawn in my favour (Rs28000/-) got dishonored. I reside in Noida. How do we prove that the cheque was given by the drawer to discharge the debt to the payee?
Answers (4)

Answer #1
973 votes
You have to disclose the facts about why this cheque was given to you. It is your duty to prove that the cheque was given in discharge of liability. You are required to discuss complete facts and back ground about the transaction.
People also ask

What does it mean by refer to drawer?

A bank may ask the payee to consult the drawer about a check payable by the bank. This is usually because the drawer does not have enough funds on his/her account. Payment will be suspended while the drawer consults the payee. Refer to the full definition of refer.

For what reasons may a cheque be referred back to the drawer?

The words written on the cheque when it is dishonoured by the bank. This is usually because there are not enough funds in the account for the person to pay the check and the manager is not willing to let the account go overdrawn.

What is the difference between refer to drawer and insufficient funds?

Referring to the drawer means you must refer to the person who issued the cheque if the cheque has not been honored. The cheque will bounce if the drawer's account has insufficient funds. 01-Jan-2022

  
Answer #2
678 votes
cheque bounce date kya hai. kis karan se bounce hua hai . aap ke account ke branch kaha pr hai. aap ne check kaha pr dala hai.check kis name se issue hua hai. check dene wala ka account kaha ka hai. pls provide all details

Answer #3
901 votes
You don't have to prove it. There's a presumption under section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act that any cheque which has bounced, and against which action is taken under section 138, what issued in part or full towards a bent/obligation. You can proceed with your complaint under section 138 and the onus will be on the accused to dislodge this presumption.
Answer #4
656 votes
In T. Vasanthakumar v. Vijayakumari, (2015) 8 SCC 378; it is held by the supreme court that when a cheque is issued it shall be presumed under section 139 of the N I Act that it has been issued in discharge of debt of other liability. section 139 read as under:
139. Presumption in favour of the holder.—It shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the holder of a cheque received the cheque, of the nature referred to in Section 138 for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability.
According to sec 139, holder is not bound to prove that cheque was issued in discharge of debt of liability. This burden is shifted upon the maker of cheque to prove that it has not been issued in discharge of debt of liability. If maker fails to prove then section 139 applies and court presume that it has been issued in discharge of debt of liability [Rangappa v. Sri Mohan (2010) SCC 441]

Disclaimer: The above query and its response is NOT a legal opinion in any way whatsoever as this is based on the information shared by the person posting the query at lawrato.com and has been responded by one of the Divorce Lawyers at lawrato.com to address the specific facts and details.

Report abuse?

Comments by Users

No Comments! Be the first one to comment.

"lawrato.com has handpicked some of the best Legal Experts in the country to help you get practical Legal Advice & help."