Cheque dishonour due to STOP Payment

It is possible to file criminal complaint under S.138 of Negotiable Insturment Act. Have you received slip from bank that due to stop payment order, they are not in a position to honour the cheque.  You have to send a legal notice to them asking for your money back.  It should be sent by registered AD or by an authorised courier services.  You have to give them 15 days time for making payment. If within 15 days you do not receive anything from them then you can file a criminal complaint.  It may take approximately 6 months for getting your money back.  ddkharpudikar@indiatimes.com.

Is it possible to send the notice with entire amount - 60,000 Rs instead of 45,000 Rs ?

Proceed under 138 NI Act & file a 420 complaint for Visa cheating.

138 notice can be only for the amount of cheque

You have to file case u/s - 138of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it is a criminal case where the offender is liable to be punished with 2 years imprisonment or with fine which may extend to twice the cheque amount or with both.

1. You have to send a demand notice within one month from the date of dishonour of the cheque ( where you mention the brief facts, state the reason for dishonour given by Bank & demand the cheque amount within 15 days from the date of receipt of notice to him )

2. After the lapse of the 15 days period from the date of receipt  of notice to him, you have to file your case within one month period.

Note these are all mandatory & u have to be careful while computing the days & any lapse may prove fatal to your 138 case .... If there is delay in filing the case then U will have to file separate application for condonation of delay before the court where u file ur 138 complaint.

You have to claim / demand the cheque amount only. It may well take more than 1 year apprx.... and if the Accused has intentions to settle the matter you can negotiate with him and be adamant for refund of the Rs. 60,000 /-

You may mention in the notice that you have given a total amount of Rs.60,000/-  However, they agreed to pay Rs.45,000/- and accordingly gave a cheque for that amount.

Hi Deepak,

Yes That's true but they have dragged this matter so much, that I feel like getting the entire amount 60,000.

Dear Friends

Please look at a judgment of our Apex Court rendered on 5-5-2009, where in the court said that only in two contingencies prosecution under Sec. 138 will  be permitted. They are in case of "Insufficient Funds" and " Where the amount exceeds arrangement. This is the tenor of the judgment. That is to say when the cheque was returned on any other ground exceptr on the two grounds mentionedin the section, the prosecutionwill not  lile.

The decision was between RAJ KUMAR KHURANA   vs  sTATE OF (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.  rendered by  Justice Sinha and Mukumdukam  Sharma.

Visit www.judis.nic.in, go to Supremecourt Judgments, click there. You will get  window, Cllick on the date of Judgment tab, then fill the date and you will bet the judgment.

PLease post your comments after that

Bye

 What happens in the events of  "stop payment" and/or "account closed"? I believe the SC had said earlier that these two eventualities also attract Sec.138.

Does the present judgement mean that only two repeat two eventualities i.e.

(i) because of the amount of money standing to the credit of

that account is insufficient to honour the cheque, or (ii) it exceeds the

amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with

that bank.

would attract Sec.138 and no other ground?

Do Court accept Email Communication as Proof ?

 If they do, it would be an extraordinary event.

This is important, becuase there are few things which are discussed over Emails and I want those things to be taken as proof which will make my case stronger.

 Does this judgement overturn all other judgements e.g. stop payment, a/c closed.

 Let us get it straight. It has been held in the past by SC that among others following happenings attract Sec.138

Stop payment, a/c closed, signature differs, refer to drawer, etc.

The judgement RAJ KUMAR KHURANA   vs  sTATE OF (NCT OF DELHI) talks of only two happendings "Insufficient Funds" and " Where the amount exceeds arrangement". It does not make even a reference to a/c closed and stop payment.

What is then the present position?