LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

138 case, general clause act 27.

(Querist) 19 November 2017 This query is : Open 
In 138 NI Act case when the Housing Finance Company evades the notice in 1991 and signatories of the cheque are proceeded with in 1994, can the signatoires of the cheque be aquitted in 1997 because the charges on the company was not pressed as if company was not arrayed as accused ?
In appeal against aqquital u/s 378 of Crpc can a defence following Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels & Tours Private Limited, (2012) 5 SCC 661 be taken that charges against company was not pressed? The Housing company has surfaced and many have succeded in consumer forums as in Jugmandar Dass Bansal V/S M/S Tapoban Housing Finance Ltd. ,R. Udaya Kumar vs M/s. Tapoban Housing Finance Limited, New Delhi,etc



You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :