Tagged: Negotiable Instruments Act

A collection of all the Judgements of Negotiable Instruments Act.

DELHI HIGH COURT – IF THE SIGNATURES ON THE CHEQUES ARE ADMITTED BY THE ACCUSED THEN THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE ACCUSED THAT THE AMOUNT AND NAME OF THE DRAWEE WERE NOT FILLED IN BY THE ACCUSED DOES NOT HAVE ANY FORCE IN THE EYES OF LAW

Delhi High Court Date of Judgement: 16.11.2016 If the signatures on the cheques are admitted by the accused, it matters little if the name of the payee, date and amount are filled up at a subsequent point in time and therefore the contention raised by the accused that the amount and name of the Drawee were not filled in by...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 – COMPLAINT CAN BE FILED EVEN AFTER SECOND NOTICE

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 10.09.2013 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 – Complaint can be Filed Even after Second Notice This matter was referred before the larger Bench by order dated 25th March, 2009. The question referred to the larger Bench was : “whether the action of the appellant was time-barred under Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act or not...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 -WHETHER THE COMPLAINT FILED IS WITHIN LIMITATION OR NOT

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 26.08.2013 Whether the complaint filed under Section 138 of the NI Act is within limitation or not…… from the date on which the cause of action arose under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138 of the NI Act? …. Whether for calculating the period of one month …. under Section 142(b),...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 – FILING OF COMPLAINT AFTER SECOND NOTICE

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 26.09.2012 In the result, we overrule the decision in Sadanandan Bhadran’s case (supra) and hold that prosecution based upon second or successive dishonour of the cheque is also permissible so long as the same satisfies the requirements stipulated in the proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The reference is answered...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 – PROSECUTION OF PERSON IN CHARGE OF A COMPANY IS NOT POSSIBLE IN THE ABSENCE OF THE COMPANY AS AN ACCUSED

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 27.04.2012 In this Criminal Appeal the common proposition of law that has emerged for consideration is whether an authorised signatory of a company would be liable for prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act without the company being arraigned as an accused. These two appeals were initially heard by a two-Judge Bench and there was difference of...