Indian Bare Acts

Search Alphabatically :

THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881

Title : THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881

Year : 1881



CHAPTER XIII


SPECIAL RULES OF EVIDENCE


118.Presumptions as to negotiable instruments-


118.Presumptions as to negotiable instruments- Until the contrary is proved, the following presumptions shall be made: -


(a) of consideragion; that every negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration, and that every such instru-
ment, when it has been accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred, was accepted, indorsed, negotiated or trans-
ferred for consideration ;

(b)as to date; that every negotiable instrument bearing a date was made or drawn on such date ;

(c)as to time of acceptance; that every accepted bill of exchange was accepted within a reasonable time after its date and before its maturity ;

(d)as to time of transfer; that every transfer of a negotiable instrument was made before its maturity;

(e)as to order of indorsements; that the indorsements appearing upon a negotiable instrument were made in the order in which they appear thereon;

(f)as to stamp; that a lost promissory note, bill of exchange or cheque was duly stamped ;

(g)that holder is a holder in due course; that the holder of a negotiable instrument is a holder in due course:provided that, where the instrument has been obtained from its lawful owner, or from any person in lawful custody thereof, by means of an SP offence or fraud. or has been obtained from the maker or acceptor thereof by means of an offence or fraud, or for unlawful consideration, the burthen of proving that the holder is a holder in due course lies upon him.


119.Presumption on proof of protest.


119.Presumption on proof of protest. In a suit upon an instrument which has been dishonoured, the Court shall, on proof of the protest, presume the fact of is dishonour, unless and until such fact is disproved.



40



120.Estoppel against denying original validity of instrument.


120.Estoppel against denying original validity of instrument. No maker of a promissory note, and no drawer of a bill of exchange or cheque, and no acceptor of a bill of exchange for the honour of the drawer shall, in a suit thereon by a holder in due course, be permitted to deny the validity of the instrument as originally made or drawn.


121.Estoppel against denying capacity of payee to indorse.


121.Estoppel against denying capacity of payee to indorse. No maker of a promissory note and no acceptor of a bill of exchange
1[payable to order] shall, in a suit thereon by a holder in due course, be permitted to deny the payees capacity, at the date of the note or bill, to indorse the same.


122.Estoppel against denying signature or capacity of prior party.


122.Estoppel against denying signature or capacity of prior party. No indorser of a negotiable instrument shall, in a suit thereon by a subsequent holder, be permitted to deny the signature or capacity to contract of any prior party to the instrument.
Last updated on May, 2015
Title : THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881

Year : 1881



CHAPTER XIII


SPECIAL RULES OF EVIDENCE


118.Presumptions as to negotiable instruments-


118.Presumptions as to negotiable instruments- Until the contrary is proved, the following presumptions shall be made: -


(a) of consideragion; that every negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration, and that every such instru-
ment, when it has been accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred, was accepted, indorsed, negotiated or trans-
ferred for consideration ;

(b)as to date; that every negotiable instrument bearing a date was made or drawn on such date ;

(c)as to time of acceptance; that every accepted bill of exchange was accepted within a reasonable time after its date and before its maturity ;

(d)as to time of transfer; that every transfer of a negotiable instrument was made before its maturity;

(e)as to order of indorsements; that the indorsements appearing upon a negotiable instrument were made in the order in which they appear thereon;

(f)as to stamp; that a lost promissory note, bill of exchange or cheque was duly stamped ;

(g)that holder is a holder in due course; that the holder of a negotiable instrument is a holder in due course:provided that, where the instrument has been obtained from its lawful owner, or from any person in lawful custody thereof, by means of an SP offence or fraud. or has been obtained from the maker or acceptor thereof by means of an offence or fraud, or for unlawful consideration, the burthen of proving that the holder is a holder in due course lies upon him.


119.Presumption on proof of protest.


119.Presumption on proof of protest. In a suit upon an instrument which has been dishonoured, the Court shall, on proof of the protest, presume the fact of is dishonour, unless and until such fact is disproved.



40



120.Estoppel against denying original validity of instrument.


120.Estoppel against denying original validity of instrument. No maker of a promissory note, and no drawer of a bill of exchange or cheque, and no acceptor of a bill of exchange for the honour of the drawer shall, in a suit thereon by a holder in due course, be permitted to deny the validity of the instrument as originally made or drawn.


121.Estoppel against denying capacity of payee to indorse.


121.Estoppel against denying capacity of payee to indorse. No maker of a promissory note and no acceptor of a bill of exchange
1[payable to order] shall, in a suit thereon by a holder in due course, be permitted to deny the payees capacity, at the date of the note or bill, to indorse the same.


122.Estoppel against denying signature or capacity of prior party.


122.Estoppel against denying signature or capacity of prior party. No indorser of a negotiable instrument shall, in a suit thereon by a subsequent holder, be permitted to deny the signature or capacity to contract of any prior party to the instrument.
Last updated on May, 2015

Find a Lawyer

Legal Hall of Fame

The current Legal Luminaries of India, the credible names in the legal circle along with those who would be the leading stars of the next decade. These are some of the reliable names in field of law. Nominate the Legal Stars of tomorrow

More

Recent Judgment


Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra( R.F.A 299 of 2014

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra (R.F.A 299 of 2014)has ruled that a woman has a right over the property of her husband but she cannot claim a right to live in the house of her parents-in-law

More

Bare Acts

Helpline Law provides a user friendly compendium of Indian Law & Bare Acts. Get a complete list & detail of Indian Bare Acts, with amendments and repeals. It comes with easy-to-use features like Search by bare acts & by year. You can even email the information to yourself!

More

Have a Legal Matter ?
Need a Lawyer?

Have a Legal Matter ?

Need a Lawyer?

Male
Female