Advocate chitra (working) 08 November 2008
Hello,
I have one Question related with Negotiable Instrument Act 138.
Iam on the accused side complainant has file one complaint. on his base is that he had supply me goods of rs. 4,00,000. he had present his affidavit and list of document on that list of document complainnant had not produced any copy of bill, challan the goods which supplied to me.
so any benifit can get the accused.?
Ajay kumar singh (Advocate) 08 November 2008
SHEKHAR MISHRA (public servant) 08 November 2008
Your question is not specific.How is it related with sec. 138 of NI Act.Please elaborate.
Akhilesh Maurya (Private legal practice) 08 November 2008
You have to see Sec. 139 of N.I.Act.
According to Sec. 139 of N.I.Act presumption is that a complaint cannot be quashed merely on the allegation by the opposite party that he issued the cheque under coercion or that he was under no legal liability. These thing would have to be substantiated by him at the trial (K.MAHABOOB JAN VS DAYAKARAN (1995)83 COMP CAS 369 MAD)
Sanjeev Dudhat (Lawyer) 08 November 2008
well it may help you to show that the alleged transaction shown by the complainant was not true.
However, in 138 the burden lies opon the accused to rebut the presumption that the cheque was given of legally enforceable liability.
Therefore you should be able to give a valid reason why you issued a cheque to the complainant if you did not owe him any thing. This is independant of the fact whether the complainant is able to prove the goods delivered to u..
it is also of much conseqence that the complainant has given you the opportuinity to make the payment of the dishonoured cheque , He had issued you a notice. So if you have not complied with demand made in the notice, what reply did you give to him. If you have'nt replied then any stand taken in the trial may not be of any force. If u are not challaning the fact of issuing the cheque in first place then u must be able to prove the cheque was not issued or the cheque was not issued for legally enforceable debt or liability. this explaination has to been satisfactorily by the Accused.
RAKHI BUDHIRAJA ADVOCATE (LAWYER AT BUDHIRAJA & ASSOCIATES SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) 18 November 2008
I DO AGREE WITH MR. SANJEEV
FOR FURTHER HELP U CAN CONTACT ME AT:
cell no-9871158578/9711364956
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE ) 10 August 2010
It is always easy to win a NI 138 case in favour of accused since there are no or requriremenrts which wihtout fail the complainant make mistakes.
For proper guidance please send all the papers. WISH YOU LUCK.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
