000			04090nam a2200253Ia 4500
003			OSt
005			20241115103223.0
008			240314s9999 xx 000 0 und d
020			_a9789391211233
040			_c.
082			_a346.09654 _bAIY
100			_aAiyar, S. Krishnamurthi
245		0	_aLaw relating to the negotiable instruments act / _cby S. Krishnamurthi Aiyar
250			_a14th ed.
260			_aGurgaon: _bLexisNexis Publications, _c2022.
300			_aclxxviii, 1253p. ; _c25cm.
505			_aIntroduction The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Chapter 1 : Preliminary Chapter 2 : Of Notes, Bills and Cheques Chapter 3 : Parties to Notes, Bills and Cheques Chapter 4 : Of Negotiation Chapter 5 : Of Presentment Chapter 6 : Interest Chapter 7 : Of Discharge from Liability on Notes, Bills and Cheques Chapter 8 : Of Notice of Dishonour Chapter 9 : Of Noting and Protest Chapter 10 : Of Reasonable Time Chapter 11 : Of Acceptance and Payment for Honour and Reference in Case of Need Chapter 12 : Of Compensation Chapter 13 : Special Rules of Evidence Chapter 14 : Of Crossed Cheques Chapter 15 : Of Bills in Sets Chapter 16 : Of International Law Chapter 17 : Of Penalties in case of Dishonour of certain Cheques for Insufficiency of Funds in the Accounts Chapter 18 : Of Penalties in case of Dishonour of certain Cheques Subject Index Table of Cases
520			_aThe present fourteenth edition marks more than 15 years of our association with this book as its revising author, which we have been doing since the 9th Edition which was published in the year 2005. The book has attained acclaim and acceptability by its readers from its very inception. After the last edition of the year 2016, some legislative changes have been made in the Negotiable Instruments Act by the Parliament by inserting section 143A and section 148 by Act 20 of 2018. Now, the trial court trying the criminal complaint filed under section 138 of the NI Act may award interim compensation to the complainant up to 20% of the amount of the dishonoured cheque. In addition, the Appellate Court is empowered by section 148 to direct deposit of 25% or more amount of the fine or compensation by Appellant/convicpending appeal subject to the outcome of appeal. Case-laws on these newly added provision have been updated in the present edition. The burden of proof on prosecution and accused in criminal cases is not on a level-playin field. As against the prosecution's rigorous burden of proving its case beyond reasonable doubt the accused is required by law to discharge burden of proving his case on a lighter scale preponderance of probabilities. As is well settled, the presumption under section 139 can rebutted and the standard of proof for doing so is that of 'preponderance of probabilities. the phrase 'preponderance of probability' is not defined anywhere in the Act nor it seems to been defined and explained in any other Act. However, in Punita Rai v State of Jharkhand another, the expression preponderance of 'probability' has been very well explained as under: The expression "preponderance of probability" has not been defined in any statute, however, in my opinion, it cannot be mere pretence of an accused. This expression refers to a positive finding on facts which are referable to probability of a situation which is more likely to happen, but it is not just a possibility. An accused can show from evidence of the prosecution or by leading evidence himself that the case set up by him is a probable one. To show that the defence set up by him is probable one the accused must show from the prosecution's evidence or by leading such cogent evidence which would prima-facie disclose a strong probability of the defence set up by him." (Source : https://lawbookshop.net/law-negotiable-instruments-act-comments-case-law-dishonour-cheques-s-k-sarvaria-s-krishnamurthi-aiyar-apoorva-sarvaria.html)
650			_aIndia
650			_aNegotiable instruments India
650			_a Negotiable instruments
700			_aSarvaria, Apoorv _eAuthor
942			_cBK _2ddc
999			_c199 _d199