07 June 2009
One "X" borrowed a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- from One "A" and deposited his documents of title. Later when "A" demanded payment for the debt "X" gave a cheque for Rs.5,50,000/- towards full satisfaction of the debt. When the cheque was presented for collection it was returned with an endorsement that "In sufficient Funds". Mr. "A" sent a statutory notice under Section 138 of N.I.Act demanding payment. "X" received the notice and sent a reply that he did not borrow the money he gave the documents to his relative "Y" for his bank loan and MR. "A" got the document from "Y" using rowdy elements, and now used the documents and cheque to unlawfully enrich, and "X" does not has a account in the bank and the cheque issued is not his Account. "X"'s relative "Y" is also one of the debtors to Mr."A". "Y" and his father one year back sent a letter admitting that Y borrowed the debt and debt of "X" also. "A" has sent a notice to the "X"'s bank that the chueque was returned for the reasons insufficent funds and not as signature differs? but x states that it is not his A/c. Bank sent a reply that the Account is a Company cheque and "Y" is the authorised person issuing the cheque. It is Now clear that both "X" and "Y" inorder to avoid their liablity "X" issued "Y's" cheque by puting "X" signature to cheated Mr."A". In the mean time 30 days lapsed and now shall i file a complaint against "X" eventhough the cheque was belong to "Y" A/c or file a cheating case under Sec 420 I.P.C against both X and Y. Advice me in this regard.
07 June 2009
You are advised hereby that, you file a complaint with police .Try to register FIR against X and Y also for cheating .If concerned police officer not taken any action then approach to the criminal court.
08 June 2009
what did the bank say in its notice to you? was is like the signature differs or was it like the insuficency of funds. if the bank has no issues with accepting the x sign that means x may also be the authorised signatory of the bank. So, present the cheque again fr encashment and once it gets dihonoured send a legal notice within 15 days and then after passing of 15 days file a complaint within 30 days.
08 June 2009
Sir, The bank in it's reply has stated that the reasons for returning the cheque is "Insufficent funds" but Y is the authorised person to sign the cheque. And also the A/c is nor personal one and it is in the name of the Company of Y and Y is the authorised person to sign the cheque. So in this case it can be understand that X gave the cheque by signing in Y Cheque leaf. Later saying it is not his cheque leaf and Mr A obtained by using Rowdy elements from Y. But Y has admitted that he borrowed from Mr.A for himself and also on behalf of X also. Kindly clarify it. Regards and thanks for both replies
10 June 2009
Shall i proceed aginst the both X and Y ie the borrower and the holder of that account and is there is any limitation to proceed as in the case of 138 of N.I.Act Clarify me Thanks and regards
11 June 2009
look if the bank has no issues with the signature that means it was a cheque validly issued by y. since the cheque has been issued and has been dishonoured, you can proceed against under 138. no bar for that. the liability to prove that no liabilty exists shall be on y.