Corporate Law : भारत में विवादित चेक को नियंत्रित करने वाले एनआई ...
Corporate Law : Explore directors' liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act during the moratorium period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy...
Corporate Law : Explore the mounting backlog of cheque bounce cases in India, the legal procedures involved, the jurisdiction of cases, and how to...
Corporate Law : As per section 143-A of Negotiable Instrument Act, the court trying an offense under section 138 may order the drawer of the chequ...
Company Law : Explore the onus to prove in cheque bounce cases (Section 138 NI Act) through a comprehensive analysis of relevant provisions and ...
Corporate Law : The Modi government in a bit to improve ease of doing business and unclogging courts has decided that 39 sections in 19 differen...
Corporate Law : Lok Sabha passes Negotiable Instrument (Amendment) Bill, 2018 a bill further to amend the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by whic...
Corporate Law : It is, therefore, proposed to introduce the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Bill, 2017 to provide, inter alia, for the followin...
Corporate Law : Proposal to promulgate the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 The Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister Shr...
Corporate Law : The main amendment included in this is the stipulation that the offence of rejection/return of cheque u/s 138 of NI Act will be en...
Corporate Law : Madhya Pradesh HC ruled IBC proceedings do not exempt signatories from liability under NI Act. Court upheld Rs. 13.73 lakh deposit...
Corporate Law : Regarding Section 14 of the IBC, court clarified that moratorium only applies to corporate debtor, not to natural persons like dir...
Corporate Law : Explore the Supreme Court judgment on whether directors who resigned can be held liable for dishonored negotiable instruments. Und...
Corporate Law : Karnataka High Court revolved around Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 in case of Shashikala Jayaram vs. Appayappa - ...
Corporate Law : No person should accept any loan or deposit of a sum of Rs.20,000/- or more otherwise than by an account payee cheque or account p...
Corporate Law : Pursuant to directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, following Practice Directions are issued to all Courts dealing with case...
Finance : Central Government hereby declares every Saturday as a public holiday for Life Insurance Corporation of India, with immediate effe...
Corporate Law : This Act may be called the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2018. (2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central ...
Corporate Law : MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (Legislative Department) New Delhi, the 29th December, 2015 The following Act of Parliament received t...
Corporate Law : NOW THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of article 123 of the Constitution, the President is pleased to p...
Sumit Bhasin Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. (Delhi High Court) Negotiable Instruments Act, provides sufficient opportunity to a person who issues the cheque. Once a cheque is issued by a person, it must be honored and if it is not honoured, the person is given an opportunity to pay the cheque amount […]
Since there was no response by the appellant at any stage either when the cheques were issued, or after the presentation to its banker, or after the legal notices were served informing the appellant that both the cheques on being presented to its banker were returned with a note that it could not be honoured because of “insufficient funds” and there was no evidence to rebut the presumption that the cheques were issued for consideration, therefore, the High Court had not committed any error in recording the finding of guilt of the appellant and convicting her for an offence being committed under Section 138 under its impugned judgment.
A person might have been jointly liable to pay the debt, but if such a person who might have been liable to pay the debt jointly, cannot be prosecuted unless the bank account is jointly maintained and that he was a signatory to the cheque.
Service of notice through registered post was proper service of notice and there was no requirement to serve notice under certificate of posting as there was no rebuttal evidence to show that the complainant has deliberately and intentionally sent the legal notice to the wrong address and the accused was not working at the place and address shown in the registered envelope.
P. Mohanraj & Ors. Vs Shah Brothers Ispat Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court) Shri Lekhi, learned Additional Solicitor General, took strong objection to the use of the expression ‘quasi-criminal’ to describe proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which, according to him, can only be described as criminal proceedings. This is for the reason […]
M/s. Kalamani Tex & Anr Vs P. Balasubramanian (Supreme Court of India) Section 118 and Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act mandates that once the signature(s) of an accused on the cheque/negotiable instrument are established, then these ‘reverse onus’ clauses become operative. In such a situation, the obligation shifts upon the accused to discharge the […]
Smt. Dharna Goyal @ Dharna Garg Vs Aryan Infratech Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Perusal of the complaint shows that the allegation of issuing the cheque is against accused No.1 from the account maintained by accused No. 1 and allegations of signing are against accused No. 2, as authorized signatory of accused No.1. The allegation […]
Supreme Court states that as per section 142(2)(a) of the Negotiable Instrument Act, the court within whose jurisdiction the branch of the bank where the payee maintains the account is situated, will have jurisdiction to try the offence, if the cheque is delivered for collection through an account.
Alibaba Nabibasha Vs Small farmers agri-busines Consortium & ORS (Delhi High Court) The Petitioner ceased to be the director of the respondent No. 2 with effect from 27th October 2010. The resignation of the petitioner was also notified to MCA. The cheques, totaling to INR 45 Lakhs, were issued on 31st December 2018 by respondent […]
Ravi Dixit Vs State of U.P. and Another (Allahabad High Court) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the summoning order is without compliance of provisions of Section 138 of the Act, 1881; the application has been falsely implicated due to enmity and financial dispute with the complainant and that cheques were dishonoured as […]
