Negotiable Instrument Act

yes.treated as proper service.presumption also in your favour.other mode of service is doubtful.don't take any risk.

sabudinesh,adv,cherthala

In case of Unclaimd,

it must be sent to correct address then service of notice is deemed to be effected on the sendee unless he proves that it was not really served and that he was not responsible for such non-service

2006 (3) RCR (Crl) 145 SC

1999 (4) RCR Crl 309 SC

latest : C.C. Alavi Haji Vs Palapetty Muhamma 2007 (3) RCR (Crl) 186 (SC)

As far as service through Courier & email is concerned some court give the weightage to the services but some are not as there is no specific mode of service explained in Negotiable Instrument, therefore, service only through courier is a risk.

If the accused do not appear after process of the court than only all these issues will arise.
 

Mr Deepak Kapoor is right.

if once the case has been registered U/S 138 & 142 NEGOTIABLE INTRUMENT  ACT,

the accused not responding to any legal notice, & the court ordered summons, and then he appear, & said

he is not taken that much amount of money, and also both(accused & complaint) the parents father came to

court decided & also requested to court  to go for compromise, as per the guidelines of the magistrate

odered to bring the money first then talk,  but the complaint refused, because accused not paying check

amount, he as given 2 checks, one check is small amount and another one is big total is 4.25 lakhs, small

amount check, accused done perfect signature and another one intensionaly done a mistake in a signature,

and

also the bank given an endorsement as a "insuficient fund" check is dishonor for both checks,

actually accused maitaining a/c balance "zero" several months & also  holding a check book, againest the

banking rules, because he is undergraduate in "commerce" passed, and also peculiar konwledge in

ACCOUNTANCY,

BUSINESS STUDIES, his marks card itself is an evidence,

the greatest master mind is used in one check  "variation inks" there is no altration in amount in the box, and

written in words, and also dates, signature.

accused is fail to prove complainant is unkown person, he didn't make any trasaction with the complainant,

evidence stage is over, complainant submitted his 2 bank account annual statement turn over on his

(professional small scale industry business) exact 7.20 lakhs one is

(current account & another one is saving bank account), and also mentioning accused name in his account

statement before taking a loan he his taken very small amount of money exact 1,000/- and another one is

1500/-, before taking a loan "money" proved accused is known person,

waiting for cross exam, and also complainant not done any income tax file, because of his confusion,

because his mother is propriater, transaction done by his son, he his the only one person konw the entire

business and also work,

now he his ready to pay  income tax as per the guidelines of ADVOCATES &  ALSO RULES , if get only his

loss amount 4.25 lakhs,

whether the complainant is recover the amount or not..................!


is there any citation for this U/S 138 NEGOTIABLE ACT............................................................!

                            DESPARATLY WAITING FOR PECULIAR SOLUTIONS.











    

 

Thank you, Sir

Great Thanks, SIR......................