Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

138--N I A IS DEAD------ALMOST

Page no : 2

YOGESHWAR. (ADVOCATE HIGH COURT-criminal /civil -youract@gmail.com)     19 February 2011

All citaions refere are from higher courts. Latest citation for SC is that you have to fact trial and oncly after completion of trial you can come out of it.


Attached File : 33 33 ni 138 sc against kerala d.pdf downloaded: 101 times

Deepak Pandey (Manager Marketing)     27 March 2011

Dear Radheji Thank you very much. I am also facing almost same problem. After reading your valuable points, now I can sleep properly after almost of 7 monts. Thanks a lot once again.

Sarvesh Kumar Sharma Advocate (Advocacy)     27 March 2011

act is act!

if improvement comes then we should prepare to face them!

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     27 March 2011

Well whatever you do experts will find way out from any law.

Arun Bansal (Soliciter)     27 March 2011

is their any judgement which shows that legal heir cannot proced the case without the permission of the court

2. also tell me the citiation which says the every document which in judicial file should be read whether it is maked or EX

 

waiting for reply 

Ramwalia (Prop.)     29 March 2011

Dear Sir,

                    I have issued a cheque from my personal A/C to a joint A/C opearted jointly by myself and my former partner as a part of settlement.I have retired from partnership and was supposed to get my capital as PDC but I never got these PDCs and I stopped the payment against the cheques issued by me.Now my former partner has filed a case under 138 NI act where as I have specifically issued the cheque as a security  in favour of Joint a/c with A/C number written on cheque.Pls guide me wheather any one person can file the case amongst the joint A/C holders

Deepak Pandey (Manager Marketing)     14 April 2011

I am doing Marketing job in private sector since last 25 years. In year 2007, I along with my close friend started construction business on mutually agreed partnership of 80:20. We got some labour oriented works. Most of time, I was on the tour for my job & to take care of business at sites. My partner used to arrange the labour & take care of their payments. Current Bank account has been opened with my name as all money required in business has been invested by me & my friend was only working partner on mutual understanding. I used to keep some signed blank cheques with my friend for making the payments to labour as most of time I was not in the town. The business suffered huge losses & could run only up to March’08. I have close down every thing & settle down all payment including my partner’s account. But unfortunately I forget to take back some blank signed cheques from my partner due to my carelessness.

Now every thing was again come to line as I concentrate only in my job. Suddenly in August’10 my wife received a legal notice of cheque bouncing for Rs 8,00,000/- (Eight Lacks only). I was even not aware the name of cheque bearer before that. I lodged a FIR (with possible documents) against my partner & accused thru lower court under section 156. Just after 15 days of first notice, I received another notice of cheque bouncing for Rs. 9,00,000/- (Nine Lacks  only). Name on the bearer of the cheque was my partner.

From some sources I come to know that they have filed a case under section 138. Till now I have not received notice from court. Police is also not doing any kind of help. I have also tried to settle down things with help of social workers but their advocate is not ready for the demand of less than 20 lacks. I am getting a salary of 42000/- PM, how can I fulfill their undue demand? Since last 7-8 months, I was not making justice to my job, can not sleep properly, feeling depression.

Can any body advice, what to do?

lissing perme (unemployed)     14 April 2011

Thank's you all for great enlightining,specially to Randip!!!

G.Nagarajeshwar Rao (Advocate)     13 May 2011

I do not agree. Act is Act. The judgments of the higher courts will be interpreted the law which is mentioned in the verabatim of the sections. The judgments will analise the legal position. The higher courts will take much and more cations to avoid the mis-use of the act. Therefore the judgments of the higher courts will be some times rout makers some times rule breakers. Therefore the judgments of the higher courts depends upon the facts of the each and every case. Therefore no worry. 

SANTOSHSINGH. (ADVOCATE sardarsena@gmail.com)     24 June 2012

This love mary was sending individual mails , now she is playing tricks by posting openlyon this forum.

Some male in guise of miss Mary.

kapoorsatish (n/a)     01 August 2012

There is misuse of this act by moneylenders who force needy to give blank cheques and then Extort money by writing double to four times amount


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register