ARJANBHAI RANABHAI VALA vs BHIMASIBHAI PUNJABHAI NANDANIYA Advocate - R.S.APARNATHI — 427/2018

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 25th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS070006422018

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

427/2018

Filing Date

07-12-2018

Registration No

427/2018

Registration Date

07-12-2018

Court

TALUKA COURT, TALALA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

25th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Acts & Sections

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 Section 138,142,

Petitioner(s)

ARJANBHAI RANABHAI VALA

Adv. D.B.VADHAVANA

Respondent(s)

BHIMASIBHAI PUNJABHAI NANDANIYA Advocate - R.S.APARNATHI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

25-03-2026

Disposed

18-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

11-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

09-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

07-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

Final Orders / Judgements

25-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The court acquitted the accused Bhimshbhai Punjabhbhai Nandaniya in this Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138/142 case. The complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt beyond reasonable doubt, despite the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Act. The accused successfully rebutted the statutory presumption by establishing that the cheque was issued as security for conditional property transactions, not for debt discharge, meeting the preponderance of probabilities standard required under law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused Bhimshbhai Punjabhbhai Nandaniya in this Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138/142 case. The complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt beyond reasonable doubt, despite the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Act. The accused successfully rebutted the statutory presumption by establishing that the cheque was issued as security for conditional property transactions, not for debt discharge, meeting the preponderance of probabilities standard required under law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, TALALA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case