Yearly Round-up 2021| Supreme Court Constitution Bench
Unlike the year 2020, the Supreme Court Constitution Bench has functioned limitedly in the year 2021, with the number of judgments delivered
Section 138 NI Act
Magistrate required to exercise judicious discretion before ordering interim compensation, S. 143-A NI Act not mandatory: Kar HC
Karnataka High Court: Rajendra Badamikar, J., reversed an order of the Magistrate which had directed the petitioner accused to deposit 20% of the
Dishonour of Cheque | Is it mandatory for trial court to award interim compensation under S. 143-A NI Act on mere invocation thereof? Del HC decides whether S. 143-A is directory or mandatory?
Delhi High Court: Anu Malhotra, J., held that the provision of Section 143A of the NI Act, 1881 is directory in nature
For summoning accused under S. 138 NI Act, recording of statements under Ss. 200 and 202 is required? All HC decides
Allahabad High Court: Sameer Jain, J., decided that whether for summoning an accused under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, recording
When does burden of proof shift to accused to rebut statutory presumption in cheque bounce cases under S. 138 NI Act? CMM Court considers
Court of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: Bhola Pandit, XX Addl. CMM, convicted a person who presented a cheque to
“Account closed” and Cheque returned: Is it a reason sufficient for convicting a person under S. 138 NI Act? Read detailed decision of CMM Court, Bangalore
Court of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: In light of cheque being returned by the bank due to “Account Closed”
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
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
Condonation of Delay | Litigants who indulge in frivolous litigation, clog arteries of justice delivery system: Read Court’s opinion on vexatious litigation
Saket Courts, New Delhi: Anuj Agrawal, Additional Sessions Judge-05, while addressing the present matter, expressed that, A litigant who takes liberty with
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)
Section 138 of NI Act| No hard and fast rule that a cheque issued as security can never be presented by drawee: Supreme Court
“A cheque issued as security pursuant to a financial transaction cannot be considered as a worthless piece of paper under every circumstance.”
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
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
Explained| Sections 138 and 141 of NI Act: Vicarious liability of directors of a company for dishonour of cheques
Supreme Court: Explaining the law relating to vicarious liability of the Directors of a company under Sections 138 and 141 of the
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
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,
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
Section 138 NI Act| Once settlement has been entered into, the complainant cannot pursue the original complaint: Supreme Court
The settlement agreement subsumes the original complaint.
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
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