LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

DR. R.R.ARORA (doctor)     20 August 2010

Give me Instructions, Rulings

I received a cheque of Rs. 2 Lack against my parental business share through an agrrement and Compromise. Party has denied the payment of cheque and stopped the payment of cheques. From Past 15 years Case is going on in Judicial Court under section 138 NI Act.  Now They are wasiting time by showing false defence evidence. Please give me latest rulings of Supreme Court after 2008 so that We could get success.


 5 Replies

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     20 August 2010

It is defficult to imagine that case is going no since last fifteen years. And where is the problem of defense witnesses you can demolish by cross if false.

Morever the SC rulings are not solution for all problems since every thing depends on facts and circumstances of the case.

So is it a real querry or just to improve your knowledge.

DR. R.R.ARORA (doctor)     20 August 2010

Thanks 4 ur response

But Its a real Enquiry. From 2002, Defence has not shown his evidence and they have taken so many adjournments and they have given so many cost.  What can I do

They have also taken the last permission from High Court  for one opportunity  But they are only delayig the time and do Talooloji. What can I do?

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     20 August 2010

First you say 15 years and now say since 2002 , there is no consistancy .

Deekshitulu.V.S.R (B.Sc, B.L)     21 August 2010

Mr Arora

The latest SC ruling on the NI Act is that no complaint will lie in case the cheque is returned by the Banker on the ground of stop payment, Accounts closed, returned to sender etc. The only two instances shown by the Apex Court are "Insufficient fund: or "Exceeds arrangement . Probablyu the defence advocate may  not be aware of the said decision, otherwise he would have reported ready and closed the matter

Deekshitulu.V.S.R (B.Sc, B.L)     21 August 2010

Mr Arora

See the undermentioned point of law

Hon'ble SC has delivered a very important judgment on applicability of S.138 of NI Act.

Raj Kumar Khurana v/s State of (NCT of Delhi) and anr.

Criminal Appeal no. 913 of 2009 decided on 5.5.2009


SC says offence under the aforsaid sec is made out only when the cheque is returned by bank unpaid for the following reasons:-

1.) amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque.

2.) If exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank.

 this is an important judgment, this issue was ealier raised by one of our members Mr. Vinod Bansal.

 this judgment is going to have big implications and thus in cases of stop payment or cheque loss complaints the offence under above said Section will not be made out.

 Even finance companies taking post dated cheques might be in a bit of difficulty now.


1 Like

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  

Popular Discussion

view more »

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query