Search Results for "Section 138 NI Act"

482 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 482 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Negotiable Instruments Act Case — Reverses Acquittal for Dishonour of Cheque. Presumption under Section 139 of NI Act stands unless rebutted by accused; accused failed to rebut presumption of legally enforceable debt.

The appeal was filed by the complainant (appellant) against the judgment of acquittal passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Banhatti, in C.C....

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Cheque Dishonour Case Due to Lack of Proper Service of Notice Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Notice Sent to Wrong Address and Not to the Correct Corporate Entity.

The petitioners, Prerana Sharma, S. Nagarajan, and B. Ashoka, filed a criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrP...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Accused's Petition to Recall Complainant for Cross-Examination in Cheque Dishonour Case. Magistrate's Rejection of Section 311 CrPC Application Set Aside as Failure to Exercise Jurisdiction.

The petitioner, Shankar s/o Nathuji Khandare, was the original accused in S.C.C. No. 5305/2009 filed by respondent no.2, APT Packaging Limited, under ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Discharge of Former Director in Cheque Dishonour Case — Resignation Prior to Cheque Presentation Absolves Liability Under Section 138 NI Act. Petitioner ceased to be director before cheque date, thus not liable as 'person in charge' under Section 141 NI Act.

The petitioner, Bindu Kumar Mehta, was accused no.3 in Criminal Case No.1009/SS/2011 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Bank's Petition in Dishonour of Cheque Case — Sets Aside Return of Complaint on Jurisdictional Grounds. Presentation of Cheque for Collection and Issuance of Statutory Notice at Mumbai Confer Jurisdiction Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The petitioner, HDFC Bank Ltd. (formerly Centurion Bank of Punjab Ltd.), filed three criminal complaints under Section 138 read with Section 141 of th...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Condonation of Delay in NI Act Complaint — Delay of Few Days Condoned on Medical Grounds. Sufficient cause shown by medical certificate for delay of 2-4 days in filing complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The petitioner, The Manmandir Co-op. Bank Ltd., filed two private complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the res...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Acquittal in Cheque Dishonour Case Due to Lack of Evidence of Debt. Failure to Prove Legally Enforceable Debt or Liability Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The appellant, M/s. Pakdhane Cement House, through its proprietor Anandrao Shamrao Pakdhane, filed a criminal appeal against the judgment and order of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Application Challenging Maintainability of Appeal Against Acquittal Under Section 138 NI Act. Complainant's Appeal Under Proviso to Section 372 CrPC Does Not Require Leave Under Section 378 CrPC.

The applicant, Madhav Shriramji Khadse, was the original accused in Summary Criminal Complaint No. 1288/2008 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instr...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Company and Director in Cheque Dishonour Case Due to Lack of Vicarious Liability. Section 141 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Requires Specific Averments of Role and Responsibility of Directors at the Time of Offence.

The petitioners, Western Projects Limited (a company) and Dinesh Singh Mehta (a director), were original accused Nos. 13 and 14 in Criminal Case No. 4...