Sec 409, 415, 418, 420 in cheque bounce case
Adv. Mohan Chandra
(Querist) 17 October 2015
This query is : Resolved
Sir,
I had given 10 blank security cheques to a bank in 2002, the bank deposited one of the blank cheques and filed suit u/s 138 in 2005, while the case was in progress the bank regularly deposited the blank cheques in 2008, 2011, 2013 and finally even after the judgement was issued against the bank in 2015, the bank also issued demand notice for all the four cheques but never filed a suit.
Now suddenly the bank has filed suit under Sec 409, 415, 418, 420 IPC in the court for a cheque for which demand notice was issued in 2013.
I wish two know the remedy for above and if a demand notice u/s 138 given in April 2013, the suit for the same is submitted u/s 420 IPC in June 2015, is this within limitation period or outside limitation period.
Regards
MANOJ HARIT
(Expert) 17 October 2015
Contact a lawyer. Cause under IPC criminal complaints are filed and NOT suits. U r mixing up things.
Complaint under IPC sections is maintainable in u r case.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 18 October 2015
Consult local lawyer and defend the cases against you.
K.S.Srinivas
(Expert) 19 October 2015
Engage an advocate to defend your case.
Adv. Mohan Chandra
(Querist) 20 October 2015
In the first case my advocate had suggested I pay and settle, but it was only on the various opinion received on this forum that I pursued the matter and was able to get a favourable judgement.
I have already hired an advocate, the opinions of Sr. Advocates on this forum is like a second opinion for major ailment. It only helps to confirm and ensure that one is progressing in the right direction.
Anirudh
(Expert) 20 October 2015
One has to know what was stated by the Bank in the Complaints u/s. 138, and what has been now stated by the Bank in the Sec. 420 complaint.
Without studying both, and without noting the contradictions if any, it will not be possible to give any appropriate answer to your query.
Adv. Mohan Chandra
(Querist) 20 October 2015
Except for the heading The complaint under 420 refers to the notice u/s 138 and seems to be a complaint u/s 138 without giving any reason whatsoever how the bank has been effected under the sections in the heading, further the when questioned on the earlier judgement and why they have not gone for appeal the legal representative for the bank has verbally submitted that they have already filed an appeal but on checking the High Court site no such appeal is evident it implies that they have made a false submission, further the judgement was of 20/6/2015 and the time limit for appeal has also expired.
