Kaveri Plastics Vs Mahdoom Bawa Bahrudeen Noorul (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court held that demand notice stands invalid in the eye of law when amount mentioned and demanded in notice send under Proviso (b) to section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act is different from actual cheque amount.
Facts- When the amount mentioned and demanded in the notice sent under Proviso (b) to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, to the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, is different from the amount for which the cheque was issued, whether the notice would stand valid in eye of law; whether a defence that such was a typographical error could be a ground which could be countenanced in law – are the questions falling for consideration in the present appeals.
Conclusion- Held that it is mandatory that the demand in the statutory notice has to be the very amount of the cheque. After mentioning the exact cheque amount, the sender of the service may claim in the notice amounts such as legal charges, notice charges, interest and such other additional amounts, provided the cheque amount is specified to be demanded for payment. A failure in above regard, namely when the cheque amount is not mentioned in the Proviso (b) notice or the amount different than the actual cheque amount is mentioned, in the notice, such notice would stand invalid in eye of law.
