Corporate Law : SC rules that directors cannot face Section 138 NI Act cases if the cause of action arises after insolvency proceedings begin unde...
Corporate Law : Understanding territorial jurisdiction under Section 138 of the NI Act. Key rulings and amendments explain where cheque bounce cas...
Corporate Law : Himachal Pradesh High Court rules that offences under the NI Act can be compounded even after conviction, following settlement bet...
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 : 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 : Supreme Court emphasizes bail as the norm, jail the exception, outlining factors judges must weigh in bail pleas, citing key judic...
Corporate Law : SC held that a duly signed cheque, even if filled by someone other than drawer, can invoke Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments A...
Corporate Law : Delhi HC rules that a mismatch between figures and words in a cheque does not invalidate it. The complaint under NI Act must go to...
Corporate Law : SC clarifies scope of Section 143A of NI Act, holding interim compensation as discretionary, not mandatory, in cheque bounce cases...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court ruled that insolvency moratorium under IBC shields corporate directors from Section 138 NI Act cases, quashing 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...
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court while dismissing the appeals held that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 would not be committed if the drawer of the cheque pays a part or whole of the sum between the period when the cheque is drawn and when it is encashed upon maturity, then the legally enforceable debt on the date of maturity would not be the sum represented on the cheque; and when a part or whole of the sum represented on the cheque is paid by the drawer of the cheque, it must be endorsed on the cheque as prescribed in Section 56 of the Act. If the cheque that is endorsed is dishonoured when it is sought to be encashed upon maturity, then the offence under Section 138 will stand attracted
Vicarious liability can be fastened on those who were incharge of and responsible to the company or firm for the conduct of its business. Supreme Court observed that a High Court can quash a cheque case only if it comes across some unimpeachable and incontrovertible evidence to indicate that the Director/partner of a firm could not have been concerned with the issuance of cheques.
Kerala High Court held that in an offence u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, when the Court imposes imprisonment and fine, fine forms part of the sentence hence the court has to order payment of compensation from the amount of fine as provided under Section 357(1)(b) of CrPC.
As per proviso to section 142(c) of NI Act, Cheque Bounce/Dishonour complaint should be filed within one month after drawer of cheque received notice
In cheque Bounce case arraigning of the sole proprietary concern rather was a condition precedent for making the complaint well constituted, as it becomes the principal offender, and, with its remaining un-impleaded, as such, the absence of its impleadment cannot make the instant complaint to be well constituted, nor, any valid prosecution can in its absence, be drawn, even against the accused petitioner, who can be assigned only a vicarious liability alongwith it.
Court, while exercising power under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act, can proceed to compound offence even after recording of conviction by courts below.
Petitioner filed instant petition under Section 482 of Cr. P. C challenging four complaints filed by respondent against him alleging commission of offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. These four complaints pertain to four different cheques.
A drawer who signs a cheque and hands it over to the payee, is presumed to be liable unless the drawer adduces evidence to rebut the presumption that the cheque has been issued towards payment of a debt or in discharge of a liability. The presumption arises under Section 139.
Held that provisions contained in Section 138 of the NI Act is to be interpreted in a liberal manner so as to achieve the object for which the said provision has been enacted. Thus, dishonor of cheque due to difference in signatures is also covered under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
Section 142(2) of N.I. Act clears that no classification of cheque, as bearer or cross cheque/account payee cheque is made for jurisdiction
