Ni act

C. P. CHUGH (Querist) 22 April 2012 This query is : Resolved
Dear All,
Recently certain issus relating to NI Act
were referred to larger bench of Apex Court.
Is there any news of the result of same.

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Shonee Kapoor (Expert) 22 April 2012
Which issues?

Regards,

Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 22 April 2012
The petition is still pending before Larger bench of Apex court.

The issues are about jurisdiction, hyper technical approach, validity of cheque etc.

Anirudh (Expert) 23 April 2012
Dear Mr. Chugh,
Can you please indicate in which case (title or the case or citation) the matter was referred to Larger Bench?

SAINATH DEVALLA (Expert) 23 April 2012
Mr CP Chugh,

IN view of conflicting judgments delivered by various high courts in the country on two questions involving cheques which bounce, the Supreme Court has referred the issues to a larger bench for an authoritative pronouncement. Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, if a cheque is dishonoured, the payee may issue notice to the drawer to pay the amount within 15 days. If he does not receive the payment, a criminal complaint may be filed before a magistrate within one month. In some cases, the payee moves the magistrate’s court even before the expiry of 15 days and without waiting for the one-month period. The question whether cognizance can be taken by the magistrate in such cases was the main issue which arose before the Supreme Court in the case, Yogendra Pratap vs Savitri Pande. The court found that there were contrary stands on this issue in the courts below

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (Expert) 23 April 2012
The news has come in legal media on 15/16 April only so it will take time.

How ever question in this ref is only about notice period that is can complaint be filed prior to expiry of notice period in cheque bounce cases.

C. P. CHUGH (Querist) 23 April 2012
Thanks all Xperts.
One more querry,
If an accused counsel is unable to argue on appointed day and the court does not allow further adjournment and closed the arguments but gave liberty to accused to file written arguments. Is it detrimental or the written arguments filed have the same force.

Thanks in advance.