SHAHID AKHTAR vs MUHAMMAD AZAM ABBAS S — 2022 CLD 949 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

SHAHID AKHTAR VS MUHAMMAD AZAM ABBAS S. 118--- Presumption of correctness---Rebuttable, nature of---Scope--- Party had to stand on its own base---Party could not be allowed to unjustly enrich itself simply on account of the presumption of correctness---Presumption under S. 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 is not a conclusive presumption rather it is rebuttable in nature and initially burden of proving that the Negotiable Instrument was executed against consideration is on the plaintiff. O. XXXVII, R. 1---Cheque dishonoured---Suit for recovery was filed by the appellant alleging that he was an electrician; that he lent/loaned an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- to respondent in presence of two witnesses; that respondent was in need of money for purpose of going abroad; that respondent executed the cheque in issue for repayment which was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds---Respondent, in his written statement, denied receiving any amount and presented photocopy of an application filed by him before concerned Police Station complaining that leaflets of his cheque book gone missing---District Court dismissed the suit---Validity---One witness being star witness of appellant was declared hostile by the appellant himself and had not been produced for the purpose of cross-examination, therefore the testimony thereof could not be relied upon---Other witness being the real brother of the appellant did not have any idea about the reason for the alleged loan or about the monthly income of his brother earned so as to be placed in a position to lend such an amount of money, therefore his testimony was not helpful in proving the case---Respondent produced copy of the application preferred to concerned Police Station about loss of leaflets from his cheque book---It did not appeal to reason that an electrician with no Bank account, no property and with no apparent high source of income could dole out huge amount by way of loan---Major contradictions existed in the evidence of the appellant, appearing as witness, about who filled up the cheque---Said witness was not an independent witness being real brother of the appellant; not aware of the monthly income of the appellant to show him financially comfortable and in position to lend the amount of money in question; was absolutely ignorant about why the loan was extended; hence, his testimony casted serious doubts about his presence during the course of alleged transaction---Appellant had to discharge initial burden of proof and which onus could have shifted onto the respondent in the event that the appellant discharged the initial burden---Non-existence of consideration was so probable in the case that no prudent man could have believed the existence thereof---Appellant failed to discharge onus of proof, could not establish his case and therefore, the onus never shifted---Appeal was dismissed accordingly.

SHAHID AKHTAR vs MUHAMMAD AZAM ABBAS S — 2022 CLD 949 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLD