Imagine someone borrowing ₹5 lakhs, leaving a cheque for the same amount as security. They later default on the loan, and the cheque bounces. They argue that the cheque was just for security, so it shouldn't count as payment, citing a Supreme Court ruli

Imagine someone borrowing ₹5 lakhs, leaving a cheque for the same amount as security. They later default on the loan, and the cheque bounces. They argue that the cheque was just for security, so it shouldn’t count as payment, citing a Supreme Court ruling. What would the outcome be in this situation?