Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Madras High Court: N. Sathish Kumar, J., while addressing a matter with regard to the dishonour of cheques under Section 138 of
In compliance with the Supreme Court’s decision dated 16-4-2021, passed in (2021) 10 SCC 598 “In Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under
Saket District Court, Delhi: Sonam Singh, MM (NI Act) acquitted the accused who was charged with an offence under Section 138 of
XVIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: Manjunatha, XVII Addl. C.M.M., found the accused guilty for the offence under Section 138 of
Unlike the year 2020, the Supreme Court Constitution Bench has functioned limitedly in the year 2021, with the number of judgments delivered
Karnataka High Court: Rajendra Badamikar, J., reversed an order of the Magistrate which had directed the petitioner accused to deposit 20% of the
Delhi High Court: Anu Malhotra, J., held that the provision of Section 143A of the NI Act, 1881 is directory in nature
Allahabad High Court: Sameer Jain, J., decided that whether for summoning an accused under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, recording
Court of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: Bhola Pandit, XX Addl. CMM, convicted a person who presented a cheque to
Court of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: In light of cheque being returned by the bank due to “Account Closed”
South-West, Dwarka, Delhi: Mridul Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate –09, on noting a very weak case of the complainant and not being able to
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi: Medha Arya, MM (NI Act-03), resolved the dispute pertaining to Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in
Saket Courts, New Delhi: Anuj Agrawal, Additional Sessions Judge-05, while addressing the present matter, expressed that, A litigant who takes liberty with
Saket Courts, Delhi: Swati Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate (South) NI Act, convicted the accused for an offence under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque)
“A cheque issued as security pursuant to a financial transaction cannot be considered as a worthless piece of paper under every circumstance.”
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru: Vani A. Shetty, XVII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes & ACMM, addressed a
Saket Courts, New Delhi: Swati Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate reiterated what is expected of an accused to rebut the statutory presumption against him
Supreme Court: Explaining the law relating to vicarious liability of the Directors of a company under Sections 138 and 141 of the
Patiala House Courts, New Delhi: Prayank Nayak, MM-01 acquitted the accused of offence under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque) of the Negotiable