LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Us 138 of ni act

Page no : 2

tonmoy (advocate)     29 August 2017

Security Cheques need to be with the company to take the products on credit. If payment is not made with the period of time then the company bounce the security cheques to recover the overdues. 

Kumar Doab (FIN)     29 August 2017

As posted in the last post by you, the equivalenrt narration might be available in agreement and or communications.

If order has been placed and billed and stock collected and mode of transaction is by cheque then buyer/dealer is under obligation to keep funds in bank a/c...........

 

Pay the billed amount and close the matter.

tonmoy (advocate)     29 August 2017

There is an agreement between the buyer and seller is that three undated cheques must be deposited with the company as a security. The day payment is not made within time then company will place the cheque to recover the money.

Now, in the cheque only name of the company is populated by the buyer along with the signature however the amount and dated is being populated by the seller. Here lies the question, is this valid and also I have heard that there is a Supreme Court judgment saying that claiming overdue amount under section 138 by bouncing security cheques is not allowed.

can anyone share the judgment of SC saying dis honour of security cheque does not come under the ambit of Section 138. 

Kumar Doab (FIN)     29 August 2017

Originally posted by : tonmoy
There is an agreement between the buyer and seller is that three undated cheques must be deposited with the company as a security. The day payment is not made within time then company will place the cheque to recover the money.

Now, in the cheque only name of the company is populated by the buyer along with the signature however the amount and dated is being populated by the seller. Here lies the question, is this valid and also I have heard that there is a Supreme Court judgment saying that claiming overdue amount under section 138 by bouncing security cheques is not allowed.

can anyone share the judgment of SC saying dis honour of security cheque does not come under the ambit of Section 138. 

 

If company has acted in accrodance with extarct of agreement posted by you, then what is the defect as per you.

Pay and close the matter.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register