Home » Cheque

Cheque

Bhupesh Rathod v. Dayashankar Prasad Chaurasia

Cheque Complaint – No Magistrate could insist that the particular person whose statement was taken on oath alone can continue to represent the Company till the end of the proceedings. Not only that, even if there was initially no authority the Company can at any stage rectify that defect by sending a competent person. 2021 (6) KHC 368

Sripati Singh v. State of Jharkhand

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – there cannot be a hard and fast rule that a cheque which is issued as security can never be presented by the drawee of the cheque. JT 2021 (10) SC 463 : 2021 (6) KHC 207

Gimpex Pvt. Ltd. v. Manoj Goel

Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 – Section 139 raises the presumption “unless the contrary is proved”. Once the complainant discharges the burden of proving that the instrument was executed by the accused; the presumption under Section 139 shifts the burden on the accused. The expression “unless the contrary is proved” would demonstrate that it is only for the accused at the trial to adduce evidence of such facts or circumstances on the basis of which the burden would stand discharged. These are matters of evidence and trial. JT 2021 (10) SC 103 : 2021 (12) SCALE 269

Triyambak S. Hegde v. Sripad

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Section 138 – the gravity of complaint under N.I. Act cannot be equated with an offence under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 or other criminal offences.

Mahendra Kumar Agarwal v. State of West Bengal

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Section 142 – Cognizance of offences – Whether depositing a cheque at a kiosk of a bank amounts to delivery through an account ? – Held, depositing a cheque at the kiosk of the bank has all the traits of presentation of a cheque by a payee or the holder in due course, through his bank account and, therefore, is to be governed by Clause (a) of Sub-section (2) of Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2021 Cri.L.J. 3889

Cheque | Ramakannan v. Chettiar & Co., Crl. R.C. No. 1439 of 2004 Mad.

  • Uncategorized

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Sections 118, 138 & 139 – Time Barred Cheques – Undated Cheque – Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as the validity of a cheque is only for 6 months from the date of issuance, the implied authorisation for filling up the cheque should certainly be within the limitation of six months and not more than the period of limitation. As it has been proved that the undated cheque was handed over one year and six months prior to the date of the cheque, the dishonour of the same would not create any criminal liability on the revision petitioner/accused.Read More »Cheque | Ramakannan v. Chettiar & Co., Crl. R.C. No. 1439 of 2004 Mad.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]