Final arguement 138 n. i .act
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 21 December 2011
This query is : Resolved
respected sir, my case on final arguement i denied signature on cheque,registerd ad,and any transsictoin with complainent.in cross ex.the complainent says the amount of real is too much to cheque amount .and he says he give the money to others on bank interest,cheque amount is 24000/only many time i said to court to pay cheque amount but complainent refused all time .complainent said in crossex.he has not licence to give money to others on interest,he said the cheque was taken in surity but he denied for surity in suggetion .pls guide me to prepare the final arguement.thnx
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 21 December 2011
138 n.i.act
ajay sethi
(Expert) 21 December 2011
1)it appears coomplainant is carrying out money lending business . if he has been giving money on interest to others and he dosent have money lender licence
as per Section 5 of the Money Lenders Act, unless there is a license, it cannot become a legally recoverable debt as the complainant is a money lender
case of V. Satyanarayana v. Sandeep Enterprises 2005 (1) DCR 203, it is held that dis-honour of a cheque issued by a money lender is not a bar for him to proceed to recover the amount and to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g
(Expert) 21 December 2011
This is a part story only still if the complainant has not examined bank for your signature than itself is sufficient defense.
But take care and cover as many defenses as possible which will be many if all the papers are seen., since power of defense is immense.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 21 December 2011
in respect of the money lending as a matter of obligation on the part of the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money, would insist, as a condition precedent, to have a money lending license. This is not a suit for recovery of money rather, the complainant is exercising the special powers provided under the Negotiable Instruments Act for non-payment and dis-honour of cheque which is more in a quasi civil & criminal in nature.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 21 December 2011
if you are willing to pay cheque amount prepare a demand draft and make an application to court for compounding .
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 21 December 2011
Dear Mr. Krishnakeshav,
When you deny the signature on the cheque, and any transaction with the complainant, why do you agree to pay Rs. 24000/-? Are you not shooting in your foot?
Deepak Nair
(Expert) 21 December 2011
1. It can be made out that the Complainant did not take any step to prove the instrument in question and the signature on the instrument is denied by you. You can bank on this issue.
2. The complainant not having a money lenders license is not necessarily a good defence in 138 matters. Even though you can go ahead including the same, but i suggest not depend on this.
3. Other issue is that of Security Cheque. But in this you will have to prove that the sheque was not issued towards any legally enforceable liability.
Sorry to say that cannot comment more without knowing the full details and perusing the evidence recorded.
Sankaranarayanan
(Expert) 21 December 2011
If ur cheque was mis used and cheated then y u feel. U can proove on ur part . I agreed mr ramachandran' view and also mr sethi for certain
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 23 December 2011
I agree with Ld. Mr. Sethi.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
