Satya Mani Tiwari
10 September 2009 at 16:53
A complain with a malafied intention is filed aginst me which is prima facie false. The Megistrate who ordered to file the complain was personally approached, he said no revision can be made, although he adviced the same can be challanged in High court with application U/s 482. wht is the correct remedy. I am not intrested to go to high court as I am confident as it is a false complain the police will put FR other wise also but what is the proper permanent remedy this way any p[erson can play with your prestige & liberty as news paper publish on main page to defame you without any reason. Please advice.SATYA TIWARIriven
Apurva Kumar
10 September 2009 at 16:01
An accused was bought to court on a trial date as trial date was fixed at that day while returning to jail under the supervision of jail authority he the accused was shot to death does it come under the preview of custodial death? Any case law plzzz nybody could provide!!!! the accused was having a nice antecedent recorda!
Regards!
AP!riven
prsmitra
09 September 2009 at 21:43
i am appearing on behalf of the complanant
1) the accused admitting his liability sent an account payee cheque for Rs.45,379/- bearing No.197572, dated 11-10-2007 in favour of our company drawn on Andhra Bank, Chintalapudi and represented that he would have sufficient funds in his account and cheque would be honoured. Believing the said representation, the complainant accepted and presented the cheque in its account at Canara Bank, Inniespeta, Rajahmundry for collection. It is submitted that surprisingly, the said cheque was returned from the accused Banker as unpaid along with return memo dated 15-10-2007 for the reason No.19 account closed to the complainant’s Banker who in turn informed the return of cheque to the complainant on 18-10-2007. It is further submitted that the accused got issued the above cheque to the complainant intentionally and knowing full well as to close of account and that cheque would be dishonoured for that reason and thereby cheated our company.
plz inform that the complainant is maintainable or not
that i am going to argue the matter shorlty.
Accused Banker enter into witness box and state that the accused did not return the cheque book to them after closing the account
riven
su
09 September 2009 at 21:32
suppose if the person delaying sending a notice ("due to illness, admit in hospital for 2 months having Dr. certificate, hepatitis viral bronchitic infection") he can't able to recover the money through court under section 138 & 141 negotiable act, is applicable or not. bank statement is given the cheque is dishonored, due to insufficient fund.riven
eswaramurthi
09 September 2009 at 20:19
whether 89th day of filing challan or final report by the prosecution will be a bar to enlarge 90 days bail to the accused ?riven
Sumir
09 September 2009 at 15:43
Is Defamation cognisable or non cognisable offenceriven
Sameer
09 September 2009 at 13:51
i think you remember me, a new controvercy is created in my case.as i had moved the civil suit against him he immidietly came to me for settelment for the 138 case and accordingly i gave him two cheques for three lakhs and he moved an application before the magistrate that he got all money from me and he mentioned the cheque numbers in his application to the magistrate and he is no more interested in continuining the 138 case further.hon magistrate told us that ho high court has given stay in this case so he cannot pass any order in this regard,so you withdraw from the high court i will pass the order,so i withdrew from the high court and the very next day he has moved an application with affidavit that i want to continue the case, on the other he presented the cheque for clearance.what should i do in this regard sir please advice. events: 31.07.2009: he moved application that he had received th two cheques for three lakhs,and he is no more interested in continuning the case of 138 against me. 04.08.2009: i withdrew from high court. 04.08.2009: he presented cheque for clearance and cheque is cleared from my bank account. 05.08.2009 he moved an application with affidavit that he had not received any cheque from me and i am interested in continuing in the case. Please guide what i can do in this regard. will the magistrate continue the case against me. or he will dismiss the case.riven
Sameer
08 September 2009 at 19:54
Dear Members,
I want to know that whether permanent exemtion is granted in Ni 138 Cases. if yes then i want some case laws.
Thanking You!
Sameer.riven
Sunlawseeker
08 September 2009 at 16:28
Hai to everyone!
My advocate has filed bail for my relatives in one case in which 307 section put. Magistrate has dismissed the petition. What is the next procedure?riven
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Negotiable Instruments Act
on 12-06-2002, the complainant trust entered a Memorandum of Understanding with one Ltd company, for becoming a franchisee of the said company. And as per the Memorandum of Understanding, the said company provided computers, 10 KVA UPS, Laser printers, Dot Matrix printers and net working products totally worth about Rs.12,00,000/- as fee for establishing College Network Lab to the complainant trust on receipt of Rs.12,00,000/- from the complainant trust for conducting Networking course to the college students of engineering college at the college campus. And according to the Memorandum of Understanding the complainant trust acted as franchisee of the said company for one year. At the time of entering the Memorandum of Understanding with complainant trust; the accused is not director of the company and only in the year 2003, he became one of the director of the said company and he is unaware about the Memorandum of Understanding entered between the complainant trust and the company.
He came to know about the Memorandum of Understanding entered between the complainant trust only in the year 2004 while seeing a copy of legal notice dated 27-01-2003, sent to the company and its erstwhile 4 directors when cleaning the office of company and he simply ignored it as it was not addressed to him. And in the month of March 2004, the secretary of the complainant trust, came to the office and informed that the company has liable to refund the balance franchisee fee of Rs.3,00,000/- out of Rs.12,00,000/- which was received by the company for giving franchisee to the complainant trust. And as the present director of the company he has to give the said amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. As he unaware about the Memorandum of Understanding entered between the complainant trust and the company, he requested the complainant to give time for verify the records for his claim regarding the MOU and assured him if the company has to repay any amount towards any liability to the complainant trust. But the complainant trust insisted him to give a cheque for Rs.3,00,000/- and promised him that he will return the said cheque, if the accused established that the company has no liability to the complainant trust in respect of the MOU. After perusal of records, the accused knew that the company is not liable to pay anything to the complainant trust and immediately sent a letter to the trust demanding return of the cheque, but the complainant trust presented the cheque and after dishonor filed case u/s.138 NI Act, only against the accused and in the complaint the complainant trust has not added the company and other directors as accused in that case. The accused is facing the trial. I need suitable citations to protect the innocent accused in that case
riven