Remember | Register | Forgot Password?
Bookmark This Page   RSS Feeds  Follow On Twitter

 

Search for Lawyers          
    



Please Wait ..


Discussion > Criminal Law > Cheques > Summons on sec 138   Unanswered Threads Post New Topic

Pages : 1 2


There are 13 Replies to this message


Naveen


Private
[ Scorecard : 30]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 13:24 Report Abuse

 Dear Experts,

Any help on my problem will be much appreciated.

My mother was a honorary director in small firm started by my relatives. About a year ago she had signed on a blank cheque with no date on them. This cheque was given as surety to Mr A from whom the firm had borrowed some money. Mr A has in turn given this cheque as a payment to Mr B for some transaction not related to the firm. 

It appears Mr B has submitted this cheque recently which bounced due to lack of funds and now he has issues summons to my mother as she was the signatory on the cheque. I am trying to find out about the date of cheque of submission and all those things to see. But  in the meantime, I'd appreciate any help on how to go about this case. 

Also, my mother was only a honorary director and she has not taken any payments for the role and she hasn't had any role in the running of the firm. Will that make any difference to this case?

Many thanks



Online certification courses in IP, IT and Social Media laws


AEJAZ AHMED


Legal Consultant/Lawyer
[ Scorecard : 12178]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 14:11 Report Abuse

Dear Naveen,

Could you clearly explain this :-

" and now he has issues summons to my mother as she was the signatory on the cheque"

becase reply required by you  from us is completely depends upon this only. 

 



Total thanks : 1 times


Naveen


Private
[ Scorecard : 30]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 14:26 Report Abuse

Mr Ahmed, thanks for your reply.

The summons have been sent by a court which I supposed is based on a complaint registered by Mr B. I haven't seen the summons as yet as it was sent to the firm's address and we haven't yet accepted it. 

Hope that clarifies. 

Many thanks

 



RAKHI BUDHIRAJA


LAWYER AT BUDHIRAJA & ASSOCIATES, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[ Scorecard : 10755]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 14:29 Report Abuse

Dear Naveen,

Tell me whether ur mother had signed as designated signatory or in person?



Total thanks : 1 times


PJANARDHANA REDDY


ADVOCATE & DIRECTOR
[ Scorecard : 5310]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 14:38 Report Abuse

DEAR NAVEEN,

PLEASE LET US KNOW ABOUT THE CHQ WHEN IT GAVE TO A,HER CAPACITY  AS OF THE SIGNATORY ETC.,



Total thanks : 1 times


Naveen


Private
[ Scorecard : 30]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 14:41 Report Abuse

Mr Buddhiraja, Mr Reddy, thanks for your reply.

I think it was in the capacity of a designated signatory.

I am sure the bank account was in the name of the Firm for which she was a signing authority apparently.



PJANARDHANA REDDY


ADVOCATE & DIRECTOR
[ Scorecard : 5310]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 14:50 Report Abuse

WETHER SHE IS STILL CONTINUEING AS SIGNTORY OR WHEN SHE OUT FRM THE FIRM



Naveen


Private
[ Scorecard : 30]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 15:08 Report Abuse

To my knowledge, she has not explicitly resigned from the firm but, the firm itself has been dissolved now. Just to add a little more background (if it helps) when the firm was started , my mother was told, she will be the one of 3 directors with 2 other cousins and she will be signing authority along with the Managing Director (who is my uncle). I believe the summons have been issued to both my mother and my uncle as the cheque has their signatures on it. 



AEJAZ AHMED


Legal Consultant/Lawyer
[ Scorecard : 12178]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 15:31 Report Abuse

Dear Naveen,

Your multiple queries ae now coming to some contradicts: -   

" About a year ago she had signed on a blank cheque with no date on them."

" I think it was in the capacity of a designated signatory."

" I believe the summons have been issued to both my mother and my uncle as the cheque has their signatures on it "

Further, neither you trying to metion all the facts step by step and clearly,  nor you are fully sure about what you are saying; as,  

" I am trying to find out about the date of cheque of submission and all those things to see "

Therefore, as per me, First Try to collect all the correct informations, then come to us for correct and helpfull suggestion, otherwise it will be difficult us to guide you also.  



PJANARDHANA REDDY


ADVOCATE & DIRECTOR
[ Scorecard : 5310]
Posted On 10 October 2009 at 18:33 Report Abuse

DEAR NAVEEN,

PLEASE NOTE::

The main object of the section 138 of Negatiable Instrument act 1881 is to inculcate faith in the efficacy of banking operations and credibility in transacting business on negotiable instruments.HERE IT SHOWS THAT THERE IS LEGALLY ENFORCEBLE DEBT TO 'A',THERE AFTER IT WAS GIVEN TO 'B' SINCE IT IS A NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT.(THE HOLDER IN DUE COURSE).

IN MY OPINION THE OFFENCE  U/S 138 ATTRACTS TO YOUR MOTHER .

 

 




Related Files



Previous Thread
Previous
Next Thread
Next

Related Threads


Post your reply for Summons on sec 138



Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to login


Not a member yet ?? Click here to signup

Message







    

  • This is a public forum. Avoid posting content which you do not wish to disclose in public.
  • Use thank button to convey your appreciation.
  • Maintain professionalism while posting and replying to topics.
  • Try to add value with your each post.





Subscribe to the latest topics :


Forum Home | Forum Portal | Control Center | Who is Where | Popular Threads | Today's Topic | Recent Posts | Today's Posts | Post New Topic | Thread With Files | Top Threads - Month | Unreplied Topics | Forum Stats


web analytics