| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 3454 2025 SLD 3454 = 2025 SHC 1993 = 2025 SHC 1999 |
1 st Civil Appeal No.S-37 of 2024
Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, J,
Appellant : Muhammad Hayat son of Dur Muhammad Palh, through Mr. Shabir Ahmed Bozdar, Advocate. Respondent : Nadeem Yousif s/o Muhammad Yousif Rajput, through Mr. Najeebullah Jalbani, Advocate.
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 489-F
Law: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Section: 118
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984
Section: 117
Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Section: XIII, XVI
Summary:
The appellant challenged the summary suit decree passed against him for recovery of Rs. 60,70,200/-, arising from a dishonoured cheque issued for payment to the respondent for procurement of fertilizer. The appellant was acquitted in related criminal proceedings under Section 489-F PPC but failed to pay the amount in the civil suit. The trial court decreed the suit in favor of the respondent, relying on the cheque, dishonour memo, and bank manager's testimony. The appellant claimed lack of documentary evidence of purchase, alleged employment status, and theft or misplacement of the cheque, but did not produce evidence to rebut the statutory presumption of the cheque’s validity.
Core Points:
- The appellant issued a cheque of Rs. 60,70,200/- which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds.
- The respondent proved issuance and dishonour of the cheque with evidence including the cheque itself, dishonour memo, and bank testimony.
- Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act creates a presumption that every cheque is issued for consideration.
- The burden shifted on the appellant/defendant to rebut this statutory presumption with credible evidence, which he failed to do.
- The appellant’s defense including allegations of theft, employment status, and retaliatory litigation lacked supporting evidence and formal complaints.
- Acquittal under Section 489-F PPC in criminal case does not negate civil liability for the cheque amount.
- The trial court correctly applied principles of civil evidence and law, and no legal infirmity warranted appellate interference.
- The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the civil decree was upheld.
Law and Section Table:
| Law / Section | Description | Application in This Case |
|---|---|---|
| Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code | Criminal liability for dishonour of cheque for insufficiency of funds | FIR lodged, appellant acquitted in criminal proceeding |
| Section 118, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 | Presumption that every negotiable instrument is issued for consideration | Court applied presumption; burden shifted to appellant to disprove consideration or validity |
| Article 117, Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 | Burden of proof in civil matters | Plaintiff bears initial burden, but statutory presumption under Section 118 affects proof burden |
| General principle of civil vs criminal standard of proof | Civil liability proven on balance of probabilities, criminal liability requires proof beyond reasonable doubt | Criminal acquittal does not bar civil recovery |
| Order XIII Rules 1&2, CPC | Granting leave to defend in summary suit | Leave to defend granted on consent |
| Order XVI Rules 1&2, CPC | Evidence rules for summary suit | Evidence admissibility and evaluation |
JUDGMENT