NO LICENCE = Dismissed cheque bounce case

giving of money on installment to others with taking of advanced monthly cheques(part principal and intrest) does require the person to take moneylenders liscence. and doing bussiness of hire purchase of vehicles money lending liscence is required.
 

hand loan or any loan it is money lending. SC in various judgments have raised this question even without applying the money lender act that how the huge sums are given just on a cheque to otherwise having no history of previous transections.

Still why cases are lost because the accused to not take proper steps at earliest opportunity and when matter is posted for evidence no proper cross is taken.

hand loan or any loan it is money lending. SC in various judgments have raised this question even without applying the money lender act that how the huge sums are given just on a cheque to otherwise having no history of previous transections.

Still why cases are lost because the accused to not take proper steps at earliest opportunity and when matter is posted for evidence no proper cross is taken.

Thanks Sashikumar ji. Can u pl give me reference of some recent SC judgements to get my doubts cleared. And can u pl clarify that EMI of products(without intrest) by the dealer is moneylending or just outstanding amount to be paid every month

Cases can not fit ibn all the situations. It depends on the advocate to take advantage by various procedures and  latches.

Thanks for the info provided by you all.

However, I have a query in this regard. The judgement referred to, deals with the case where the Money Lender is an individual.
 So, does a private/public limited company needs a money lender's licence if it deploys its surplus funds by way of giving loans to other body corporates (u/s. 372A of the companies act) or any individual pursuant to appropriate board resolution to this effect???? and that money lending is not the primary business of such company.

Thanks in advance.

Sanchari

INTRA-Corporate Lending & Borrowing, is outside the purview of Money Lending provisions.  All the parameters under the Companies Act must be followed eg. BOD resolution, Capital provisions, Contract Act provisions, etc....

HOWEVER, in case a corporate deals with the "public"  for Lending & Borrowing, then Money Lenders Act and the RBI Act, is mandatorily attracted automatically and violation of such acts, will render the loaned amount as  "non-recoverable" under the N.I.Act (alone) BUT may be recovered thru other legal proceedings.

Keep Smiling .... Hemant Agarwal

https://lawyersclubindia.com/forum/138-N-I-A-IS-DEAD-ALMOST-29868.asp

ONE LATEST JUDGEMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED BY BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE YEAR 2010 REPORTED IN BANKMAN ON DISHHONOUR OF CHEQUES . NO LICENCE NO COMPLAINT U/S 138 MAINTAINABLE.

please see the full version of judgment

sir will this good judgement  will help me in Jammu court also as there is no rule(law) of moneylending in Jammu&Kashmir plz reply

J&K IS NOT BOUND ON THIS NI ACT, THERE ARE  SEPARATE MONEY LENDING AND PREVENSION ACTS

This license is required only for professional money lenders. If the loan is given as a hand loan, by a friend or relative they need not have the license.

99% NI ACT CASES ARE FILED BY ILLEGAL MONEY LENDER WE CAN ESTABLISH THAT BY THEIR NO. OF SUCH CASES IN THE SAME COURT.

come on... all  my  lerned friends .....  i think no one has read d facts of  d cases.........

i still beieve that  n.i. act is very effective n only  one tool to recover d  money 

in abovementioned case im surprise that why applicant disclose that he has given money to 10 others people??

whyyyyyyyyy .....and total amount  i s80 lacks.........

learn d  law my dear  friends   

what d eveidece act  says 

what is important in examination of  witness........................ what  not  to ask 

remember it....