Srinivas.B.S.S.T
05 April 2009 at 21:16
While issuing notice under section 138 of NI Act by mistake the complainant firm was mentioned as "a proprietary concern represented by its proprietor" instead of "Partnership firm represented by its Managing Partner".
Now complaint has to be filed. Will the error crept in the notice will weaken the case of the complainant?.
Manish Kumar Gupta
04 April 2009 at 14:21
Hi all..
We all know that in the proceedings of fidelity insurance policey or Cash in transit policy or other policy related to theft or burglary or misappropriation, A Non Traceble Report is required from police station where we have lodged the FIR.
I want to know that is there any time period fixed for getting that report from police station under any Sec. of Cr. P. C.
Or after how many days we can get it from police authority.
Manish..
Jitendra Raval
03 April 2009 at 20:03
The complinant filed a case under S.138 againt accused before complition of 15 days mandatory time available to the accused for the payment.
The complaintant was in a hurry to screw the accused.
The court has already issued the process.
Will it be tenable in the court of law?
What are the remedies to the accused?
Can he approach high court for quasing the process?
Please suggest the remedies quoting cases if any.
Jitendra Raval
03 April 2009 at 19:58
Complainant has filed only statement of accout of the accused which she obtained from the concerned bank through some ways. Can it be allowed as an evidence? There are accouting entries of two cheques in the statement. Will it be sufficient to prove the debt? or complainant can be asked to produce another supportive evidences? what will be status about "Legally enforceable debt"
Jitendra Raval
03 April 2009 at 19:52
Can accused be exempted from remained preset during proceedings as the accused is placed 700 km. from the city complaint filed. It is very difficult to get mode of transport and he is working in a nationalised bank.
What are the remedies for the accused. Plase suggest caselaws if any
Jitendra Raval
03 April 2009 at 18:07
The complaintant sent the legal notice to the accused. It was the inter state communiction. i.e Gujarat and Maharashtra, The complainant written the address on the BOTH envelop in Gujarti Language and numbers mentioned in the address was also in Gujarti language. The notice was send through RPAD AND UPC. The postal department has admitted in writing that the particular intimation given to flat no C-103 instead of C-703 and hence remained unclaimed and returned to the sender after prescirbed period. Non of the notice was received by the accused. The complainant filed complaint under S.138.
1. Is the confirmation by the postal department itself about the wrong intimation of the envelope will be sufficient defence for accused?
2. Regarding notice send by UPC since the address was written in same way not delivered to the accused. Is accused Safe?
03. Can accused file complaint against the postal department in Customer redressal forum for the damage caused to the accused for such non delivery?
04. What are the rules of postal department in such inter state communicaion?
Kindly suggest the related caselaws subcribe to your answer if any.
With regards to all.
Member (Account Deleted)
02 April 2009 at 17:28
what is the liability in case of accused issued a Bearer Cheque to the Complainant as an friendly cash?????? will the accused punised under NI Act 1881
Rajesh Semwal
02 April 2009 at 14:05
Respected Members,
PLease tell me about the above term and Section apply on it.
lakshmi
02 April 2009 at 11:27
What is the meaning of filing a pursis?
The present context relates to a 138 complaint wherein evidence of the complainant has already been recorded but the representative has left the orgn. The court is insisting that not to declare the repr. as hostile witness instead file pursis in the Court i.e. give off evidence.
Hence, clarification is required whether filing of pursis is a correct thing to carry out or not.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Remanding the case
The Special court passed an order u/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C to register a case and investigate the complaint.
The accused challenged the order before the HC for the 3 reasons
1] The special judge is not competent to send the complaint U/s 156(3)
2] The accused are not Public servants and so the Special Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the case
3] The court is errored in sendingt the case to police u/s 156(3)Cr.P.C with out conducting and enquiry on the complaint
The HC quashed the order of the special sourt and remanded back the case to special court for re-considering the above three points. The order in sending the case back to special court whether legal?