dishonour of cheque Archives

J&K and Ladakh HC | Dishonour of cheque; HC advices Criminal Courts to impose fine equivalent to amount of cheque plus at least 6% interest per annum

Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: Sanjeev Kumar, J., held that the sentence of fine under Section 138 of N.I.Act must

Case Briefs District Court

What is the consequence of complainant’s failure to explain the occasion for issuance of cheque in his favour? How does it affect S. 138 NI Act complaint? Del Court answers

South-West, Dwarka, Delhi: Mridul Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate –09, on noting a very weak case of the complainant and not being able to

Case Briefs District Court

If a cheque was issued in favour of complainant, would she still be required to prove loan transaction as she would have been in civil trial recovery? Court explains

Dwarka Courts, New Delhi: Medha Arya, MM (NI Act-03), resolved the dispute pertaining to Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Section 138 NI Act| Can’t defeat the complaint merely because it does not elaborate upon Managing Director’s authorisation: SC

Supreme Court: In a case relating to dishonour of cheques where it was alleged that the complaint was filed by the managing

Case Briefs District Court

Dishonour of Cheque | Not filling details in cheque, Non-filing of ITR by complainant, Handing over cheque as security, etc.: Delhi Court discards all defence, orders conviction under S. 138 NI Act

Saket Courts, Delhi: Swati Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate (South) NI Act, convicted the accused for an offence under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque)

Case Briefs High Courts

Ker HC | Absence of salutation like M/s, Mr or Miss while drawing a cheque is immaterial for offence under S. 138 of NI Act; HC sets aside the acquittal, directs Trial Court to re-address the issue

Kerala High Court: Gopinath P., J., held that adding or omitting prefix like M/s, Mr And Mrs. while drawing the cheque is

Case Briefs District Court

Presumption and Rebuttal under NI Act: Read Court’s verdict discussing onus of proof and nature of defence where “payment stopped by drawer”

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru: Vani A. Shetty, XVII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes & ACMM, addressed a

Case Briefs District Court

Mere denial is useless, Presumption under S. 138 NI Act can be rebutted only by leading cogent evidence: Court holds accused guilty where “payment stopped by drawer”

Saket Courts, New Delhi: Swati Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate reiterated what is expected of an accused to rebut the statutory presumption against him

Case Briefs District Court

Law on Dishonour of Cheque | Loan given in cash, no documentary evidence available. Lender files a complaint under S. 138 NI Act: Read how ‘presumption’ under S. 118 (a) plays a role

Patiala House Courts, New Delhi: Prayank Nayak, MM-01 acquitted the accused of offence under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque) of the Negotiable

Case Briefs District Court

Law on S. 138 NI Act | Cheque dishonored, case filed under S. 138 NI Act: Can borrower raise defense that lender had no financial capacity to lend money? Complete report on ruling by Tis-Hazari Courts

Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi: Devanshu Sajlan, MM NI Act-05, while noting the ingredients of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,

Case Briefs District Court

Accused has to rebut presumption under NI Act, once signature on cheque is admitted? Delhi Saket Courts examines

South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi: Bhanu Pratap Singh, MM (N.I. Act) found the accused guilty of an offence under Section 138

Case Briefs High Courts

All HC | For offence of dishonour of cheques, what needs to be given priority – Compensatory aspect or Punitive aspect?

Allahabad High Court: Chandra Dhari Singh, J., expressed that, Merely because the litigation has reached a revisional stage or that even beyond

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Whether wilful breach of undertaking given to Court would amount to Contempt of Court under S. 2(b) of Contempt of Courts Act? SC elaborates

Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ., observed that, an undertaking given by a party should be

Case Briefs High Courts

Can mere dishonour of cheque amount to abetment of suicide? Bom HC decides

Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of V.K. Jadhav and Shrikant D. Kulkarni, JJ., held that, Mere dishonour of cheque and refusal

Case Briefs High Courts

Does a decree automatically follows when a Metropolitan Magistrate take cognizance of an offence under S. 138 NI Act? Read on

Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J., decided a matter concerning dishonour of cheque. Petitioner had filed a suit for recovery of Rs

Case Briefs High Courts

All HC reiterates scope of inherent powers to quash a S. 138 NI Act complaint. Imposes exemplary costs for filing petition as an after thought

Allahabad High Court: Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J., refused to exercise and inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash a complaint

Case Briefs High Courts

Madras HC | Cheque returned with endorsement “drawers signature differs”. If complainant fails to prove accused was not stranger, can he still be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act? Court answers

Madras High Court: P. Velmurugan, J., addressed a matter revolving around the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A

Case Briefs High Courts

J&K HC | Is ‘mens rea’ an important component to be proved while addressing issues under S. 138 NI Act? Explained

Jammu and Kashmir High Court, Srinagar: Sanjeev Kumar, J., while addressing a matter in respect to Section 138 NI Act, stated that

Case Briefs High Courts

Guj HC | Can offence under S. 138 NI Act compounded even after accused is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment? Read HC’s ruling

Gujarat High Court: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J., compounded an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and set aside the

Case Briefs High Courts

Del HC | Vicarious liability under S. 138 NI Act. What is proper stage of raising defence of absence of knowledge by the accused being held vicariously liable for offence committed by company? Explained

Delhi High Court: Rajnish Bhatnagar, J., held that: “Once a cheque is issued by a person, it must be honored and if