Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Company - Complaint against company and its Directors - Directors signing the cheque - They cannot escape their liability on the ground that they resigned after signing the cheque but before the cheques were deposited in the bank. (M/s.Sumida International Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs M/s.Rama Vision Limited) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 494 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Company - Dishonour of cheque - Company Secretary filing complaint on behalf of company - Specific authorisation for filing each case is not required when there is general authorisation to an officer of the Board of Directors. (M/s.Sumida International Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs M/s.Rama Vision Limited) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 494 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Company - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint by power of attorney holder - Even if initially there was no authority, still the Company can, at any stage, rectify that defect - At a subsequent stage, the company can send a person who is competent to represent the company. (M/s Voltas Ltd. Vs M/s Vidharbha Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 519 (A.P.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 689 (A.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Company - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint by power of attorney holder - Particular person, whose statement was taken on oath, at the first instance is not required to represent the company till the end of the proceedings - There can be occasions when different person can represent the company - It is open to the company to seek permission of the Court for sending any other person to represent the company in the Court. (M/s Voltas Ltd. Vs M/s Vidharbha Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 519 (A.P.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 689 (A.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonor of cheque - Company - Director resigned prior to issuance of cheque - No counter credential projected by complainant - Petitioner cannot be fastened with criminal liability under S.138 of the N.I. Act. (Lachhman P.Udhani & Ors. Vs M/s.Redington (India) Ltd.) 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 956 (Madras) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 135 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - - Cheque drawn for discharge of time-barred liability - Dishonour of cheque will fall within the sweep of S.138 of the Act. (Ramakrishnan Vs Gangadharan Nair & Anr.) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 713 (Kerala) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 459 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Account closed - Complaint is maintainable. (A.K.Chaudhary & Ors. Vs Nandita Malhotra) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 593 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Accused transacting business on behalf of company on commission basis - Accused purchasing potatoes from complainant on behalf of company - Accused issued cheque in discharge of debt of company - Held, accused is validly prosecution - Conviction upheld. (J.Ramaraj Vs IIiyaz Khan) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 458 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 726 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Advancing loan of a huge amount of Rs.3.16 lakhs - Complainant himself used to borrow money from his brothers, father and others - Complainant failed to show that he had any financial capacity to advance such a huge amount - Accused acquitted. (K.Prakashan Vs P.K.Surenderan) 2007(3) Apex Court Judgments 429 (S.C.) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 713 (S.C.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 371 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Bank endorsement "Account expires" - Amounts to dishonour of cheque - Provision of S.138 of the Act is attracted. (M/s Voltas Ltd. Vs M/s Vidharbha Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 519 (A.P.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 689 (A.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Blank cheque - Cheque issued as security for transaction between the parties - When blank cheque is issued by one to another, it gives an authority to the person, to whom it is issued, to fill it up at the appropriate stage with the necessary entries regarding the liability and to present it to Bank - On dishonour of cheque accused is not absolved of the liability. (Moideen Vs Johny) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 220 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Blank cheque - Cheque issued for cost of goods to be supplied by drawee - Bank account closed after issuance of cheque - Cheque presented to bank for realisation and same dishonoured - No criminal liability for the reasons that (i) cheque when issued was blank; (ii) Cheque when presented for payment, was time barred as it was presented for payment after expiry of six months reckoned from date on which it was issued in blank; (iii) cheque when issued was not towards any existing debt or liability - Order of trial Court acquitting accused calls for no interference. (Vishnudas Vs Vijaya Mahantesh) 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 865 (Karnataka) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 276 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Blank cheque theory - Cheque signed by drawer - Cheque filled up by some other person putting the date and amount - Drawer cannot get absolved of the liability u/s 138 of the Act. (T.N.Unnikrishnan Vs T.K.Ramankutty & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 655 (Kerala) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 897 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cause of action - Defective notice - Name of bank incorrectly mentioned - It is a defective notice - Cheque again presented and again dishonoured - Prosecution launched on the basis of dishonour of cheque for the second time - Held, cause of action begins to run not on the issuance of a defective notice but it started to run on issuance of notice on dishonour of cheque for the second time. (Aniyan Thomas Chacko Vs The Varvelil Bankers & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 262 (Kerala) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 236 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Change in date - It is for the complainant to prove that change in the date was made with the consent of accused. (Fragrant Leasing & Finance Company Ltd. Vs Jagdish Katuria & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 840 (Allahabad) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 281 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Change of date without authorisation - Material alteration - Accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. merely stated that he gave the cheques but it no where speaks about the change in dates - Held, complainant cannot get any benefit of statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. (Fragrant Leasing & Finance Company Ltd. Vs Jagdish Katuria & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 840 (Allahabad) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 281 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque issued as security for repayment of debt - It is a negotiable instrument - Dishonour of cheque - Drawer of cheque incurs liability of prosecution under S.138 of the Act. (S.T.P. Limited, Bangalore Vs Usha Paints & Decorators, Bangalore & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 335 (Karnataka) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 614 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque issued as security for repayment of loan - Cheque continues to be one issued for the discharge of liability as contemplated u/s 138 of the Act. (K.P.Rathikumar Vs N.K.Santhamma & Anr.) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 546 (Kerala) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 343 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque issued as security for repayment of loan - Cheque will continue to be one issued for discharge of liability as contemplated under S.138 of the Act. (Rathikumar Vs Santhamma) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 024 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque issued for discharge of a time barred debt - Held, such a cheque is within the sweep of S.138 Negotiable Instruments Act. (P.N.Gopinathan Vs Sivadasan & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 729 (Kerala) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 1077 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque issued in respect of uncertain future liabilities - Dishonour of such cheque does not attract prosecution u/s 138 of the Act. (M/s Sathavahana Ispat Ltd. Vs Umesh Sharma) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 499 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 333 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque issued to discharge promissory note - Material alterations in promissory note and request for sending pronote for expert examination - Plea taken for the first time at appellate stage - Not permissible. (S.P.Muthu Vs Kirupakaran) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 382 (Madras) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 635 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque issued towards repayment of loan - Money lender - Not possible to lend money without any document - Date of lending money not mentioned in complaint and notice - Ledger extract or any letter sanctioning loan amount or pronote to show sanction of loan not produced - Presumption u/s 139 is not available - Defence version is probabilised that cheque was issued by way of security for loan given by complainant to his brother and his brother is already convicted and present proceedings instituted by him to realise amount once again from surety is not maintainable - Accused acquitted. (M.Senguttuvan Vs Mahadevaswamy) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 687 (Karnataka) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 337 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque issued towards time barred debt - Accused cannot be convicted u/s 138 of the Act. (Zaheeda Kazi Vs Mrs.Sharina Ashraff Khan) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 163 (Bombay) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 069 (Bombay) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 733 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque not issued for a debt or liability - Burden of proof is on the accused. (Shanaz D'Souza Vs Sheikh Ameer Saheeb & Anr.) 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 1029 (Bombay) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 131 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque not presented in Bank for encashment within six months from the date on which it was drawn - No offence u/s 138 of the Act is made out. (Geeta Vs State of U.P. & Anr.) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 810 (Allahabad) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 540 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque returned with bank endorsement 'present again' - Despite notice payment not made - Held, reasons for dishonour of cheque are wholly irrelevant - If despite notice amount remains unpaid then drawer of cheque is responsible u/s 138 of the Act. (Yogendra Kumar Gupta Vs Ram Prakash Agrawal) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 272 (M.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Closure of account - Account was closed even on date of issue of cheque - Account was closed not by accused but by Bank in accordance with rules governing current account - Held, accused is not liable when he had no notice of closure of account. (Nagaraja Upadhya Vs M.Sanjeevan) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 387 (Karnataka) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 167 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - An employee filed complaint on behalf of company - Letter authorising employee to file complaint not filed - Though this is a curable defect but same not removed even during trial - Held, complaint not maintainable for want of authority letter. (Fragrant Leasing & Finance Company Ltd. Vs Jagdish Katuria & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 840 (Allahabad) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 281 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Chairman or Director - Pleading - There must be an averment that the person who is vicariously liable for commission of the offence of the Company both was incharge of and was responsible for the conduct of the business of the Company - Such requirement must be read conjointly and not disjunctively. (Everest Advertising Pvt.Ltd. Vs State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.) 2007(2) Apex Court Judgments 191 (S.C.) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 708 (S.C.) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 791 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Complaint by Director of Company on behalf of company - Documentary evidence not filed to show that he is Director of Company and has been authorised by the Company to file and depose on behalf of the company - Dismissal of complaint - Held, justified. (Director, Maruti Feeds & Farms Private Limited, Dharwad Vs Basanna Pattekar) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 385 (Karnataka) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 012 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Complaint filed through power of attorney holder - Authority letter or power of attorney whereby attorney was authorised to file complaint on behalf of company not filed - Complaint, held, rightly dismissed. (Lakshmi Srinivas Savings & Chit Funds Syndicate Pvt. Ltd. Vs S.Bhojarajan) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 803 (Madras) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 562 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Director - Tendered his resignation prior to issuance of cheque - Not liable for the offence committed by company - Order of issuance of process against Director quashed and set aside. (Amit Mohan Inder Mohan Sharma Vs M/s.Mamta Agency & Ors.) 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 805 (Bombay) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 089 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Director - Vicarious liability - Director who negotiated for obtaining financial assistance on behalf of the Company cannot be held vicariously liable - It does not give rise to an inference that he was responsible for day-to-day affairs of the company - Vicarious liability on the part of a person must be pleaded and proved - It cannot be a subject matter of mere inference. (K.Srikanth Singh Vs M/s North East Securities Ltd. & Ors.) 2007(3) Apex Court Judgments 024 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 525 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 850 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Director - Vicarious liability - It must be pleaded that accused was responsible to the Company for the conduct of the business of the Company. (K.Srikanth Singh Vs M/s North East Securities Ltd. & Ors.) 2007(3) Apex Court Judgments 024 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 525 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 850 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Director - Vicarious liability - Must be pleaded and proved - It cannot be a subject matter of mere inference. (K.Srikanth Singh Vs M/s North East Securities Ltd. & Ors.) 2007(3) Apex Court Judgments 024 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 525 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 850 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Directors - Pleading - As a result of fall out of non payment negotiations were held between parties wherein Respondent Nos.2 and 3 took part - Held, there is no doubt that ingredients of S.141 of the Act stand satisfied. (Everest Advertising Pvt.Ltd. Vs State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.) 2007(2) Apex Court Judgments 191 (S.C.) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 708 (S.C.) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 791 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Manager filed complaint - Manager not duly authorized by Board of Directors to sign and file the complaint - Not a ground for quashing the complaint. (Bhasin Credit Aid Ltd. Vs Raj Kumar) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 607 (Delhi) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 502 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Prosecution of Chairman and Director of Company - Concurrent finding of Trial Court and First Appellate Court that accused were in charge of and were responsible to company for conduct of its business - Such finding needs no interference in revision. (S.Parameshwarappa & Anr. Vs S.Choodappa) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 763 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 592 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Winding up orders of company passed and official liquidator appointed - Complaint against Directors of Company in respect of cheques presented and dishonoured after winding up orders are passed is not maintainable. (Ratan Lal Garera & Ors. Vs State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 318 (Delhi) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 277 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Compensation - By imposing the sentence of imprisonment alone complainant cannot recover the money from accused - Accused directed to pay compensation equal to that of cheque amount. (Selvaraj Vs N.Jeyaraman) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 646 (Madras) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 869 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complainant is at liberty to file a suit for recovery of the amount as well as a complaint for bouncing of the cheques. (Smt.Mymoona Vs H.M.Trading Company, Mangalore & Anr.) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 688 .(Karnataka) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 910 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Delay - Application for condonation of delay not filed alongwith complaint - It is a curable defect - Complainant directed to file affidavit setting out reasons for delay in filing complaint and trial Court directed to provide opportunity to accused to raise their defence - If Court is satisfied that there are adequate and cogent reasons to condone delay, then same to be decided on merits. (R.Kanthimathi & Ors. Vs Bank of India ) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 330 (Madras) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 403 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Dismissed in default for single instance of non appearance of complainant - Complaint ordered to be restored to be decided on merits. (Print Links (India) & Anr. Vs M/s.Kiran Paper Convertors & Merchants & Ors.) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 711 (P&H) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 695 (P&H)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - During pendency of complaint Court allowed the son of complainant, his general power of attorney holder, to continue the proceedings - No ground to quash the proceedings. (Bodapati Naga Krishna Gandhi Vs Sri Ilapakurthi Sri Ramulu & Anr.) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 147 (A.P.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 271 (A.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Filed within two days of refusal to receive notice - Complaint is premature. (M/s. Sarav Investment & Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Llyods Register of Shipping Indian Office Staff Provident Fund & Anr. ) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 527 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Forms part of the record and it need not be marked and non marking is not fatal to the complainant's case. (Jayamma Vs Lingamma) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 466 (Karnataka) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 287 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Quashing of - Non supply of goods for which cheque was issued - Not a ground to quash complaint - It is a matter of fact which has to be proved before a Court of law. (M/s.Shirdi Overseas Imports & Exports & Anr. Vs M/s.Serve Overseas & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 638 (P&H) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 1057 (P&H)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint by power of attorney holder - Failure to produce power of attorney authorising to lodge complaint and to give sworn statement on behalf of his principal - Dismissal of complaint for want of proof of power of attorney justified. (Ranjitha Balasubramanian & Anr. Vs Shanthi Group, Bangalore & Ors.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 362 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 475 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint by power of attorney holder - If transactions are witnessed by power of attorney or he has full knowledge of the transactions, his statement can be recorded by Magistrate for verification of the complaint. (Shanaz D'Souza Vs Sheikh Ameer Saheeb & Anr.) 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 1029 (Bombay) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 131 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint filed - Regarding same very cheques FIR lodged u/ss 420, 406 IPC - FIR quashed. (Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.420, 406). (Harinderpal Singh Vs State of Punjab) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 637 (P&H) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 976 (P&H)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint filed by husband on behalf of wife on the basis of authority letter - Husband neither a general nor special power of attorney holder - In the authority letter it was no where undertaken that the executant would be bound by the acts done and conducted on her behalf in respect of the cheque - Held, complainant not competent to institute the complaint - Complaint quashed. (O.P.Mehra Vs Raj Kumari Bhalla & Anr.) 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 847 (P&H) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 181 (P&H)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint through power of attorney holder - Power of attorney - If not filed at initial stage can be filed even at a later stage when validity of the same is questioned and Court then has to decide the genuineness or the validity of the same. (K.Gopalakrishnan Vs Karunakarann rep.by the Power of Attorney Holder) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 559 (Madras) (DB) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 683 (Madras) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint under section 138 of the Act - Cheque alleged to be forged before filing complaint - Accused lodged complaint under sections 464, 468, 389, 420 r/w section 511 IPC - Bar under S.195(1)(b)(ii) is not applicable - In the interest of justice both matters ordered to be heard and disposed by same Court together and at the same time. (Ramanand Vs Kailasnath & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 658 (Bombay) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 509 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Consideration - Drawer of cheque regular customer and purchasing goods on credit - Drawer admitting balance amount shown as due in running account, as true and correct - Dismissal of complaint on ground of non production of invoices relating to sales of goods held, not proper - Accused liable to conviction. (Ganesh Enterprises, Bangalore Vs D.R.Sarala) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 779 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 524 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Conviction - Default sentence - Accused to undergo two months SI on failure to pay compensation amount within two months - Such default sentence shall lapse at any time when the payment is made either before or after the default sentence starts running. (K.G.Girish Kumar Vs M/s Muthoot Capital Service Pvt.Ltd. & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 385 (Kerala) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 704 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Conviction - Plea that there was no legal liability on the part of accused to make payment towards goods delivered because of exaggerated bills - Plea not taken as a part of defence through cross examination - In reply to notice no such plea raised - Conviction not liable to be interfered with. (S.N.Dabholkar Vs Duroplus India Pvt.Ltd. & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 542 (Calcutta)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Conviction - Sentence of simple imprisonment and fine - Appeal against - Appeal/Revision cannot be dismissed for non deposit of amount of fine. (Vijay D.Salvi Vs State of Maharashtra & Ors.) 2007(3) Apex Court Judgments 248 (S.C.) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 164 (S.C.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 298 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Court to carry out proper verification before issuing process - Verifications required are : (1) Verification of a complaint on oath which should be in a proper manner i.e. all the facts necessary to constitute the offence must be borne out from the verification; (2) If Company then person representing the Company should be duly authorised; (3) Complete postal addresses of complainant and accused; (4) Statement of the complainant that all the accused persons named in the complaint are Directors/Partners and that they are liable under the Act and to verify the status of accused and the extent of involvement in the commission of offence; (5) That the accused is the signatory to the instrument in question; (6) Fact of issuance of statutory notice and Court should insist for some formal proof in the form of acknowledgement receipt etc.; (7) Whether the concerned Firm/Company, Society/Institution, Partner/Director or Proprietor are joined as parties or not; (8) Whether the complaint has been filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under S.138 of the Act; (9) Whether there are any specific allegations against each accused or not. (Dr.Rajan Sanatkumar Joshi Vs Rajnikant Govindlal Shah & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 577 (Gujarat)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Delay of 3 days in filing complaint- Condonation - Delay can be condoned only on issuance of notice to accused. (Sajjan Kumar Jhunjhunwala & Ors. Vs M/s.Eastern Roadways Pvt.Ltd.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 812 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Director - Resigned before issuance of cheque in question - No averment in complaint as to how and in what manner petitioner was responsible for conduct of business of company or otherwise responsible to it in regard to its functioning - Complaint against petitioner quashed. (Dr.Rajan Sanatkumar Joshi Vs Rajnikant Govindlal Shah & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 577 (Gujarat)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Discharge of liability - Cheque issued for settlement of trade liabilities - Forms valid consideration - Dishonour of cheque justifies penal action u/s 138 of the Act. (Sree Sakthi Paper Mills Ltd. Vs Anjaneya Enterprises) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 660 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Endorsement on cheque 'sans recourse' - Contention that cheque itself speaks that payee will not have recourse to file the complaint, taking cognizance is barred - Held, when once cheque is dishonoured, the endorsement on the cheque made by accused without knowledge of the complainant and in absence of mentioning the said fact in reply notice given by accused, the prosecution cannot be quashed exonerating the accused from the liability u/s 138 of the Act. (Maganti Ganta Avadhani Vs Kopuri Sreenivasa Rao) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 034 (A.P.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 294 (A.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Extension of date of cheque - When a drawer revalidates cheque from time to time, which is permissible, then on each occasion there is a fresh promise as envisaged by S.25 of Contract Act as well as an acknowledgment within the meaning of S.18 of Limitation Act if such revalidation is made within the period of limitation - Held, liability is legally enforceable liability. (Vijay Ganesh Gondhlekar Vs Indranil Jairaj Damale) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 647 (Bombay) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 957 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Fine/or compensation - Power of court to impose fine may or may not be limited but power to award compensation is not - Consideration for payment of compensation is somewhat different from payment of fine. (P.Suresh Kumar Vs R.Shankar) 2007(2) Apex Court Judgments 140 (S.C.) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 84 (S.C.) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 082 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Firm - Cheque issued in name of firm but complaint filed by a firm different from the one in whose name cheque was issued - Notice issued by firm which was different from the one in whose name cheque was issued - Notice issued in itself defective - Entire proceedings vitiated on this ground alone. (Lakshmi Srinivas Savings & Chit Funds Syndicate Pvt. Ltd. Vs S.Bhojarajan) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 803 (Madras) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 562 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - For invoking criminal liability under S.138 of the Act, cheque is required to be presented to the drawee bank or the payee bank within the period of six months from the date of its issue. (Shrikant Chavan Vs Hotel the Vaishno Devi) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 368 (J&K) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 009 (J&K)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Holder in due course - Partnership business dissolved - Cheque of Rs.40,000/- entrusted to brother of complainant - Agreement reduced to writing - Cheque drawn and handed over to brother of complainant could not have been made use of by the complainant, unless the complainant has a case that accused did not honour the agreement and that consequent on that his brother had handed over the cheque and thus he became a holder in due course - Transaction relating to cheque not as alleged in complaint - No offence is made out u/s 138 of the Act - No reason to interfere in the order of acquittal. (Madamuttathil Abdul Razak Vs M.Yousaf) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 759 (Kerala) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 1025 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Ingredients of offence u/s 138 of the Act are : (i) a cheque was issued; (ii) the same was presented; (iii) but, it was dishonoured; (iv) a notice in terms of the said provision was served on the person sought to be made liable; and (v) despite service of notice, neither any payment was made nor other obligations, if any, were complied with within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the notice. (S.M.S.Pharmaceutical Ltd. Vs Neeta Bhalla & Anr.) 2007(1) Apex Court Judgments 668 (S.C.) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 127 (S.C.) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 026 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Issued as security - Even if cheque is issued as a security for payment, it is negotiable instrument and encashable security at the hands of payee - Not a ground to exonerate the penal liability u/s 138 of N.I. Act. (Umaswamy Vs K.N.Ramanath) 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 106 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 096 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Jurisdiction - Court at the place of office of Advocate who issued statutory notice has no territorial jurisdiction - Complaint ordered to be returned for its presentation before the proper Court. (Harihara Puthra Sharma Vs State of Kerala & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 168 (Kerala) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 012 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Jurisdiction - Court at the place where money was intended to be paid has jurisdiction - Court at place where cheque was presented for realisation has no jurisdiction to try the offence. (Ahuja Nandkishore Dongre Vs State of Maharashtra) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 618 (Bombay) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 771 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Law does not mandate proof of original transaction or existence of original consideration - In a prosecution under S.138 of the Act, Criminal Court is not to adjudicate on the liability to discharge with the cheque is alleged to be issued. (Johnson Scaria Vs State of Kerala) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 196 (Kerala) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 161 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Legally enforceable debt - Rebuttal of presumption - Ink of signature different from the ink of other writings of cheque - Entire cheque amount found not due in view of admission of receipt of certain amount - No legally enforceable debt - Acquittal, held, proper. (V.Rama Shetty Vs N.Sasidaran Nayar) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 815 (Karnataka) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 536 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 231 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Legally enforceable debt or liability - Cheque issued in discharge of liability arising out of an agreement void ab initio - Provision of S.138 of the Act is not attracted. (Virender Singh Vs Laxmi Narain & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 750 (Delhi) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 430 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Limitation - Notice issued but received back with endorsement 'no such addressee' - Cheque presented against and dishonoured again - Notice issued again - Cause of action arises only on receipt of second notice - Limitation starts to run from receipt of second notice. (T.N.Unnikrishnan Vs T.K.Ramankutty & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 655 (Kerala) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 897 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Loan - No instrument executed though a huge loan was advanced - Even no interest thereon charged - Earlier accused did not pay instalments in respect of the prized amount of chitties - Loan advanced inspite of the fact that three civil suits for recovery of money against accused were pending - Complainant not approaching Court with clean hands and his conduct not that of a prudent man - Held, accused has discharged his burden to rebut the presumption available u/s 139 of the Act - Order of acquittal, upheld. (John K.John Vs Tom Varghese & Anr.) 2007(3) Apex Court Judgments 655 (S.C.) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 690 (S.C.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 974 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Material alteration - Account number changed without consent of drawer as drawer of cheque had closed the account of which the cheque was issued - Amounts to material alteration - Instrument void in law - No action lies u/s 138 of the Act. (B.Krishna Reddy Vs B.K.Somashekara Reddy) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 526 (Karnataka) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 440 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Misutilisation of blank signed cheque - Sending cheque to handwriting expert - Admission of signature in cheque is not equivalent or synonymous with admission of execution - Magistrate directed to forward the cheque to expert for comparison if accused wants the admitted handwritings/specimen writings to be compared with the disputed writings in the cheque. (Bindu Vs Sreekantan Nair) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 517 (Kerala) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 626 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Money lending business - Question as to complainant having no money lending licence is not relevant in a complaint filed u/s 138 NI Act which is more in quasi civil and criminal in nature. (S.Parameshwarappa & Anr. Vs S.Choodappa) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 763 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 592 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Non appearance of accused due to illness - Process not issued - Single default not sufficient to dismiss the complaint in default when cause shown by complainant for absence is not disbelieved. (Manjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 260 (P&H)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - An omnibus notice without specifying as to what was the amount due under the dishonoured cheque does not subserve the requirement of law. (M/s.Rahul Builders Vs M/s.Arihant Fertilizers & Chemical & Anr.) 2007(3) Apex Court Judgments 554 (S.C.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 990 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Can be served either through Registered Post or through UPC - Notice if dispatched through UPC with correct address of the drawer written on it, presumption of service of notice arises unless the drawer proves that it was not received by him in fact and that he was not responsible for such non service. (V.K.Jain Vs Sharad Jagtiani) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 781 (Delhi) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 887 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Cheque issued for part payment of outstanding bills - Cheque dishonoured - By issuing notice demand made of payment of pending bills and not cheque amount - Held, notice is not valid. (M/s.Rahul Builders Vs M/s.Arihant Fertilizers & Chemical & Anr.) 2007(3) Apex Court Judgments 554 (S.C.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 990 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Demand of loan amount and not demand for payment of cheque amount and further demand of damages on account of mental torture - Demand not in accordance with requirement of the provision of S.138 of the Act - Complaint founded on this demand notice is not maintainable. (Kapil Aggarwal Vs Raghu Vias) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 106 (Delhi) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 136 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Demand of payment not made in notice - Held, it is not a legal notice strictly in terms of S.138(b) of the Act. (Haryana State Small Industries Vs Laxmi Agro Industries) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 274 (P&H) (DB) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 269 (P&H) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Despatch of notice within 30 days is the requirement of law - Date of receipt of notice is not crucial or relevant. (Ravi Vs Kuttappan) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 337 (Kerala) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 071 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Not received by accused - Cheque presented again - Bank not accepting the cheque - Bank had no occasion either to honour or dishonour the cheque - No cause of action - Complaint dismissed. (Manibhadra Marketing Pvt. Ltd & Anr. Vs Chandrakant Manilal Kothari & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 142 (Bombay) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 260 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Proof of - Carbon copy of notice not filed - Photostat copy of notice not admissible in evidence - Accused admitted having received notice and that he replied notice - Complaint cannot be held to be defective on ground of lack of proof of notice. (Fragrant Leasing & Finance Company Ltd. Vs Jagdish Katuria & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 840 (Allahabad) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 281 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Received back unserved as door locked for several days - It must be deemed that notice has been served - Order returning complaint set aside with a direction to take the complaint on file and proceed in accordance with law. (Pavulmanickam Vs M.S.Jeyachandran) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 622 (Madras) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 942 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Received back unserved with endorsement "addressee long absent and return to sender" - Order taking cognizance not liable to be quashed - However, the allegation that accused refused to receive notice even after due information given by postal authorities are matters for trial. (Asif Akbani Vs P.K.Mani) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 184 (Madras) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 221 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Refusal by addressee - Refusal to accept notice is deemed a proper service - Counting of 15 days starts from date of notice or the date on which notice was refused. (Dinesh Sahu Vs Dr.R.K.Jain & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 899 (M.P.) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 478 (M.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Refusal to receive - Complaint when found to be well within time then non mentioning of date of service or refusal of notice in complaint is not harmful to the complainant. (Dinesh Sahu Vs Dr.R.K.Jain & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 899 (M.P.) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 478 (M.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Sent through registered post at correct address - Notice received back 'unclaimed' - Held, notice is presumed to have been served. (Jayamma Vs Lingamma) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 466 (Karnataka) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 287 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Service of notice - Where sender dispatched notice by post with correct address written on it, then presumption can be drawn that it is served on the addressee unless he proves that it was not really served and that he was not responsible for such non service. (Armstrong Builders & Developers Vs Vishvanath Naik) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 707 (Bombay) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 1099 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Undelivered letter or A.D. not received back - Allowance of period of service of notice which at least should be a week is admissible in this regard - Period to file complaint is thus extended to a further period of a week. (ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs Prafull Chandra) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 532 (Delhi) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 731 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice issued - Assurance given to present cheque again and that it will be honoured - Tendering of cheque for the second time will not frustrate the cause of action which arose on tendering the cheque for the second time. (Haryana State Small Industries Vs Laxmi Agro Industries) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 274 (P&H) (DB) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 269 (P&H) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice issued but no complaint filed - Cheque can be presented for the second time and complaint filed on fresh cause of action in case : (i) Envelope addressed to the complainant is lost or damaged or destroyed in transit; (ii) the letter does not reach the respondent for want of correct address; (iii) the envelope so received by the respondent is short of notice and it is blank; (iv) the letter so posted is not received by the actual addressee and the postage is stolen in transit; and (v) As assured and promised by the respondent, the cheque has been tendered for the second time. (Haryana State Small Industries Vs Laxmi Agro Industries) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 274 (P&H) (DB) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 269 (P&H) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice sent - Receipt of notice denied - On the other hand prayer made for dismissal of complaint on plea that complaint is barred by time in view of notice served by complainant - Held, these are inconsistent pleas and are self contradictory and an afterthought which is apparently carved out to resist the claim of complainant. (Haryana State Small Industries Vs Laxmi Agro Industries) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 274 (P&H) (DB) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 269 (P&H) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Offence when committed - It is not giving of notice which makes offence - It is the receipt of notice by drawer which gives cause of action - Cause of action is complete when drawer fails to make payment within 15 days of receipt of notice - Offence is deemed to have been committed only from the date when notice period expires - Normally cause does not arise until the commission of offence. (Haryana State Small Industries Vs Laxmi Agro Industries) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 274 (P&H) (DB) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 269 (P&H) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Only the drawer of cheque is liable - A payee or an endorser is not liable under S.138 of the Act. (P.N.Gopinathan Vs Sivadasan & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 729 (Kerala) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 1077 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Partnership firm - Absence of averment in complaint that accused is incharge and responsible for the conduct of the business of the firm and as to how and in what manner he was so responsible - Complaint qua petitioner quashed. (Anil Kumar Vs State & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 739 (Delhi) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 1038 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Partnership firm - Mis-descripttion of accused as proprietor whereas he was a partner - Complaint not to be rejected on this ground. (Anil Kumar Vs State & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 739 (Delhi) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 1038 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Partnership firm - Partner - Specific averments in complaint revealing role played by them and that they looked after day to day affairs of the firm - Plea that petitioner was not a partner in firm or that he was not involved in day to day affairs of firm - Such fact to be established at trial - No ground to quash complaint. (Chhedi Lal Gupta Vs Shri Suresh Damani & Anr.) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 672 (Calcutta) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 274 (Calcutta)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Pendency of civil suit for recovery of cheque amount - Not a bar for proceeding u/s 138 of the Act - Provision of S.138 of the Act is an additional criminal remedy over and above the civil remedy available. (Sree Sakthi Paper Mills Ltd. Vs Anjaneya Enterprises) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 660 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Plea of accused that blank cheque as security was given and even after repayment of loan cheque was misused - Accused admitted in his cross examination that cheque was given to repay the debt - No merit in contention that blank cheque was given - No ground to interference in concurrent finding of conviction. (Sharad Kumar Tiwari Vs Smt.Laxmi Tiwari) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 808 (Rajasthan)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Power of attorney holder - Complaint signed by power of attorney holder in his own name and not on behalf of complainant - Complaint is maintainable and not bad in law. (K.Gopalakrishnan Vs Karunakarann rep.by the Power of Attorney Holder) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 559 (Madras) (DB) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 683 (Madras) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Power of attorney holder - It is not required to record the sworn affidavit of complainant also on a future date to enable the Court to exercise its discretion u/ss 202 & 203 of Cr.P.C. (K.Gopalakrishnan Vs Karunakarann rep.by the Power of Attorney Holder) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 559 (Madras) (DB) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 683 (Madras) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Pre mature complaint - Cannot be rejected on this ground alone - However, cognizance can be taken on such a complaint after it is matured. (Yogendra Kumar Chaturvedi Vs Ashok Kumar Goyal & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 387 (Rajasthan) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 334 (Rajasthan)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Pre-mature complaint - However, cognizance taken after maturity of complaint - Mere presentation of pre mature complaint need not necessarily render the complaint liable to be dismissed - No ground to quash proceedings. (Prashant M.Aachawal Vs Gulab Singh Raghuvanshi) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 251 (M.P.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 201 (M.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Premature complaint - Not proper to dismiss complaint - Complaint should be kept pending till the ripening of cause of action or complaint to be returned with an advice to the complainant for presentation after completion of necessary statutory period. (V.S.Shivadas Vs Ramanath Shetty & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 747 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 905 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Production of books of account maintained by complainant - Permissible only when debt or liability is disputed by accused and existence of account books/papers is admitted by complainant. (Rajeev Soni Vs Indresh Singh) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 782 (M.P.) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 888 (M.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Quashing of complaint - Whether there is any enforceable debt, whether accused gave the cheque for discharge of such debt and whether there was any material alteration in the cheque are the questions to be considered during the course of trial - Complaint not to be quashed on these grounds. (Maganti Ganta Avadhani Vs Kopuri Sreenivasa Rao) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 034 (A.P.) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 294 (A.P.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Quashing of complaint on ground that complainant is not a holder in due course - Question can be decided only when parties lead evidence - No ground to quash complaint. (Anil Kumar Jaiswal Vs State & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 730 (Allahabad) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 982 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Receipt of information from Bank - It can be in any language and through any mode - written, electronic, fax or even verbal. (A.K.Chaudhary & Ors. Vs Nandita Malhotra) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 593 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Sentence - Cheque amount 4 lakhs - Accused sentenced to two years imprisonment and to pay compensation of Rs.5 lakhs - Sentence reduced to one year imprisonment but order of compensation upheld. (Sharad Kumar Tiwari Vs Smt.Laxmi Tiwari) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 808 (Rajasthan)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Sentence - Cheque amount Rs.20,000/- - Accused sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of Court - Accused to pay Rs.27,000/- as compensation and in default to undergo S.I. for a period of one month - If realised the entire amount be released to the complainant. (K.P.Rathikumar Vs N.K.Santhamma & Anr.) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 546 (Kerala) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 343 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Sentence - Two cheque of the value of Rs.55,500/- - Fine imposed Rs.2500/- in each case without any direction to pay amount due on cheques bounced - Complainant should at least be compensated with the amount due by the accused on the cheque issued by him - That should be the rule unless there are good reasons to depart from the same - Sentence imposed set aside and case remanded with a direction to pass appropriate sentence in accordance with law. (Shri Basavraj D.Allayyanvar Vs Shri Santosh Kapadi) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 658 (Bombay) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 437 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Service of notice by hand delivery - Refusal - Presumption of service cannot be raised as the same is not effected in terms of the statute. (M/s. Sarav Investment & Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Llyods Register of Shipping Indian Office Staff Provident Fund & Anr. ) 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 527 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Seven cheques issued on different dates - Separate notices issued - Seven complaints are maintainable - However, in case single notice is issued then all the transactions covered by the notice would be regarded as a single transaction, permitting a single trial. (Rajendra B.Choudhari Vs State of Maharashtra & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 523 (Bombay) (DB) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 748 (Bombay) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Seven cheques issued on different dates - Separate notices issued - Seven complaints filed - Trial for each offence held separately and accused convicted - Held, it is not obligatory for the trial Court to direct in all cases that subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with the previous sentence - Refusal of Magistrate to direct the subsequent sentence to run concurrently with the previous sentence cannot lead to causing miscarriage of justice. (Rajendra B.Choudhari Vs State of Maharashtra & Anr.) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 523 (Bombay) (DB) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 748 (Bombay) (DB)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Signature in cheque - Admission of signature in cheque is not equivalent or synonymous with admission of execution - By mere admission of signature right of accused to contend that a blank signed cheque was misutilised by the payee is not taken away. (Bindu Vs Sreekantan Nair) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 517 (Kerala) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 626 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Signature on cheque denied - No steps taken to prove that the said signature is that of the accused - Complaint is liable to be dismissed. (Nagaraja Upadhya Vs M.Sanjeevan) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 387 (Karnataka) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 167 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Signatures denied - Handwriting expert - When cheque is dishonoured for insufficiency of funds then there is no need for handwriting expert to give his opinion on signature on cheque - In case of denial of signature of drawer of a cheque, the best witness would be the concerned Bank Manager and not a handwriting expert - Impugned order allowing application not sustainable in law. (H.M.Satish Vs B.N.Ashok) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 328 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 549 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Signed blank cheque - Defence that a signed blank cheque was handed over by an account holder is inherently suspicious - Burden rests heavily on shoulders of account holder to claim absolution from culpable liability. (Bhaskaran Nair Vs Abdul Kareem) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 104 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - 'Stop payment' - For valid reasons - Burden of proving that cheque was not dishonoured for sufficient funds and was dishonoured for valid reasons is on the accused - Complaint cannot be quashed on this ground. (Nagendra Prasad Singh & Anr. Vs State of Bihar & Anr.) 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 698 (Patna) : 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 999 (Patna)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Stop payment - In no way absolve statutory liability cast upon accused - Accused liable to be punished u/s 138 of the Act. (Balasubbaraj Vs R.Narayanan) 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 073 (Madras) : 2007(4) Criminal Court Cases 073 (Madras)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Summoning order - Accused appeared through counsel and moved an application for exemption from his personal appearance - Application dismissed and non bailable warrants issued and also issued process u/ss 82/83 Cr.P.C. - Order set aside - Issue of non bailable warrants and issue of process u/ss 82/83 Cr.P.C. is not required when accused is represented through his counsel and it is not a case where he is absconding and evading the court process. (Sanjay Chaturvedi Vs State) 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 392 (Delhi) : 2007(2) Criminal Court Cases 044 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Summoning order - Detailed reasons need not to be given. (Kulbir Singh Uberoi & Anr. Vs M/s.Kumar Industries) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 181 (P&H) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 142 (P&H)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Summoning order - Has to be on the basis of allegations in complaint and preliminary evidence - Defence set up in reply to notice not to be looked into at that stage. (Kulbir Singh Uberoi & Anr. Vs M/s.Kumar Industries) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 181 (P&H) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 142 (P&H)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Summoning order - Quashing of - Plea that goods were rejected and complainant was not entitled to get the cheque encashed - Summoning order cannot be quashed on this ground - Plea is available at the time of defence. (M/s V.V.Enterprises & Anr. Vs M/s Bansal Industries) 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 917 (P&H) : 2007(4) Civil Court Cases 037 (P&H)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - There was no debt or liability at the time when cheque was given - Complaint not maintainable - Summoning order quashed. (Exports India & Anr. Vs State & Anr.) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 198 (Delhi) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 252 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Evidence Act, 1872, S.47 - Dishonour of cheque - Expert opinion - Signature on cheque disputed - Court undertook exercise of naked comparison of signatures of accused on cheque with other admitted signatures and came to conclusion that signature on cheque does not appear to be signature of accused - Court should be assisted by experts opinion - Banker is more competent to say whether it is signature of accused or not with reference to specimen signatures - Issuance of cheque proved - Presumption arises u/s 139 of Act in favour of complainant - Acquittal not valid. (Rajendra Prasad Vs M.Shivaraj) 2007(1) Criminal Court Cases 220 (Karnataka) : 2007(2) Civil Court Cases 161 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Holder in due course - Cheque payable to bearer - Respondent is deemed to be holder in due course of cheque - Has locus to file complaint on dishonour of cheque. (Sardar Jasvir Singh & Anr. Vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 534 (Allahabad) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 865 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Jurisdiction - High Court of one State cannot quash criminal proceedings pending in a Court within jurisdiction of another High Court. (Tripti Vyas Vs M/s Ahlers India Pvt.Ltd.) 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 469 (Rajasthan) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 232 (Rajasthan)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Notice - Absence of pleading that notice was sent at the correct address of the drawer by registered post acknowledgement due - However, returned envelope annexed to complaint and thus it formed part of the complaint - Returned enveloped showed that it was sent by registered post acknowledgement due to the correct address with endorsement that 'the addressee was abroad' - Held, requirement of S.138 of the Act is sufficiently complied with. (C.C.Alavi Haji Vs Palapetty Muhammed & Anr.) 2007(2) Apex Court Judgments 526 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 001 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 037 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Notice - Claim as to non receipt of - Drawer can still make the payment of cheque amount within 15 days of the receipt of summons and can absolve himself of prosecution u/s 138 of the Act - If drawer does not make payment of cheque amount within 15 days of the receipt of summons then plea of proper service of notice is not available to him. (C.C.Alavi Haji Vs Palapetty Muhammed & Anr.) 2007(2) Apex Court Judgments 526 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Civil Court Cases 001 (S.C.) : 2007(3) Criminal Court Cases 037 (S.C.)