Can we prove PDC issued to discharge legal debts not for Sec

Regarding your query:-

First question:- Negative:- No you cannot prove that PDC issued to discharge his legal debts not for security purpose, if there is a sufficient document with accused on this issue.

Second question:- Negative: First of all your case may not stand so where is the question of sending accused to the jail.  

Other interesting thing is that yourself only admitting that opponent issued PDC for security purpose, I cannot do anything, it is waste of time and waste of court time also.

Another important observation is that Cheque in question is actually issued by opponent as a security purpose and not for discharge of any legal debts.   

Regards

Basavaraj.r

Yes I agree with Mr.Basavaraj. Mr.Gowada you can contact any one local lawyer to come out form this probelm.

You can sue him if you have not execute any document with that person, in which it is written that you are taking this cheque for security purpose only.

If all these  communication are verbal, only than you can sue him by telling that this cheque was given against purchase of goods, for payment of amount of Rs. 5 Lac. No need to say that the cheque was given for security, confidently say that it was given for payment of the said amount and it bounced.

Dear Author,

I'm interested to handle ur case but there are some queries to make clear from u. U can call me at 9871158578.

 Thanks to Mr.Ashok Yadav for your valuable advise to me.

Madam RAKHI BUDHIRAJA,

I’m very happy to see your response but at the time accepting PDC ‘this cheque issued against security purpose only’ has been written by opponent behind the cheque with email copy.

The opponent told me that if he failed to pay the outstanding the said cheque can be enchased for payment, at his promise only I dealt with him and presented the said cheque when he did so.

I heard that hon’ble SC has already been held that - cheque issued for security purpose -got bounced-service of legal notice was not served properly- section 138 is not attract.

Now I understood that because of my mistake I’m suffering a lot. Can you confirm me whether Can I go for 138 or recovery of money under CPC or let you know what are the remedies are available for me to recover my due’s from the opponent.

Earliest feed back shall be helpfully for me.   

Dear Mr.Gowda

As I said in my previous feed back , you cannot prove that PDC issued for legal debts not for security purpose.

With reference to your respond I would like to quote the Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgment on the similar matter.

K.NARAYANA NAYAK V/S M.SHICARMA SHETTY

Criminal Appeal No.504/2002 decided on 11-04-2008.

N.I.Act (26/1881) Section 138.

Acquittal- Security Cheque

Acquittal-Notice-Liability –Complaint of dishonor of cheque-acquittal by trial court –appeal against-complaint alleging dishnour of cheques-service of demand notice not satisfactory orived-cheque is issued by accused as a security and not for discharge of any existing debts, as on date of issuance of said cheque-impugned order is based on proper appreciation of evidence-no need to interfere with order of acquittal.   

Regards

Basavaraj.R 

Thanks to Mr.Basavaraj sir, for your good feed back