Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

seema sharma ( manager)     02 March 2012

Accused discharged as cheque is stamped in name of bank

sir,

 recently i had filed for a 138 matter as we are complainant , and after full  proceeding  before the court. Court discharged the accused on the basis of point that the cheque issued contains stamped name of my client .

pls guide, what are the remedies, and whether it is right to discharge accused on the basis of fact that cheque is not handwritten. wordings and signatures are handwritten. only compalinant name is  stamped.

pls guide



Learning

 3 Replies

R Trivedi (advocate.dma@gmail.com)     02 March 2012

Can you paste the relevant portion of the order. I am sure the complainant must have failed in couple of other points as well. Generally if everything else is handwritten , then it is quite difficult to believe that payee name is stamped, this may happen if there are too many cheques issued in the name of payee on regular basis. 

1 Like

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     04 March 2012

Weird, but would like to see the order.

 

 

Regards,

 

Shonee Kapoor

harassed.by.498a@gmail.com

Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech.] (Scientist/Engineer)     14 March 2012

What was the reason given by the bank for returning the cheque? Was it that the name was only stamped and not handwritten? If the cheque was returned by the bank for insufficient funds in the drawer's account, the accused cannot escape merely because the name was stamped. Generally the accused will not have a stamp with the name of another person and in this case that of the the complainant. He may have used the name stamp of the complainant  with or without his knowledge or permission. I do not think that there is anuthing in the Act which makes a cheque with the name of the payee stampted on it not valid. Reserve Bank of India issues instructions to banks on many things including criteria for acceptance or rejection of instruments. For instance previously an altered cheque was still valid if the alteration was endorsed by full signature of the drawer. Now Reserve Bank has given instructions that that a cheque with alterations should not be paid even if endorsed by drawyer with full signature.

If the cheque was returned unpaid just for the reason that the name was stamped the Complainant will still have claim on the accused for the amount. But I do not think that the accused can be punished on that count.  The accused can claim that he honestly believed that it was a valid cheque. By accepting the cheque the compalinant also believed that the cheque was valid.

There appears to be more to this case than what meets the eye. The matter is so trivial that it could have been mutually settled without going to court.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register