Important Judgment on NI Act

sir, Kiran G and Sir reddy G and all experts, please solve following,

a proprietor firm-partnership writen on 5-7-2004,notary on24-7-2004,Registration on 29-7-2004
2 no.chaque thept with propritor renuka's signature @ propritor seal on 16-7-2004,and stop payment on 17-4-2004. after on 3-8-2005 a chaque produced of Rs 3,00,000 and disowner.complanaint Bharat said money give cash on 23-7-2004 with statement of bank.chaque was blanck but filled by bharat.
witnes of bharat is partner sangita;s husband Rajender. Renuka went court-202crpc against bharat but decision against. now on trial. due evidence of comlanant just near.
After Registration till now partner is no working any type, no signature authorised in bank.
Please help me earliar. Thank You.
Natwar raj purohit. hasband of Renuka

sir, Kiran G and Sir reddy G and all experts, please solve following,

a proprietorship firm  -partnership writen on 5-7-2004  ,notary on24-7-2004,  Registration on 29-7-2004
2 no.chaque thept with proprietor renuka's signature @ proprietor seal  on 16-7-2004,  and stop payment on 17-4-2004.   after on 3-8-2005 a chaque produced of Rs 3,00,000 and disowner  .complanaint Bharat said money give cash on 23-7-2004 with statement of bank     .chaque was blanck but filled by bharat.
witnes of bharat is partner sangita;s husband Rajender.  Renuka went court-202crpc against bharat  but decision against.   In the Ni act  138           now on trial. due cross of comlanant just near.
After Registration till now partner is no working any type, no signature authorised in bank.
Please help me earliar. Thank You.
Natwar raj purohit. hasband of Renuka

YOU HAVE TO PROVE THE THEFT OF THE CHEQUES, THEN EVERY THING WILL BECOME EASY.

Sir Reddy G,

I was present a aplication in bank in mainsion that my chaque is mising  and stop payment.

bank was issue a certificate of for  only stop payment  on 17-7-2004.

what  it evid. document is not enough for prove of thept chaqe?

Natwar Raj Purohit

NO, YOU REQUIRE AN  FIR FROM POLICE OR G.D NO. TO ESTABLISH THE THEFT.

Reddy sir,

When refuse of registering of FIR in police on19 -1-2006 becouse of late information dueto police,  Then we were went in court where inquiry in202crpc which result was against us.

Now what can we do  ? Please suggest.

Natwar raj Purohit

First of all with due respect to all the opinions here please note :-

1) Stop payment is no excuse for NI 138 cases.

2) Underchaptor XX of Cr P C for summons cases there is no provision for dismisal of case on any ground once process is issued. It has to face the regular trial.

Friends having defferent opinon , please enlighten with actual cases.

Dear,

Then what happen of Decision of supreme court placed by shri Kiran kumar advocate.

Natwar raj purohit

Mr. Purohit,

I think you need to prove that Cheque was stopped on the date you state. You may need to call your bank officer to prove the same. Once you prove that cheque was stopped on the date you state, obviously cheque would have been issued before that date.

As per banking norms and even under the Negotiable Instruments Act, a cheque has to be deposited for payment with 6 months of issuance of same. Otherwise same becomes stale and payee can not claim the payment of same.

Even otherwise, you state that as per complainant's version, money was advanced on 23/07/2004 whereas cheque was stopped on 17/04/2004. Therefore, there you had no legal liability towards complainant on the date of issuance of cheque.

Sir,

Shri satya prakash G,
Thankyou.

The date of stop payment is misprint here, that is actual 17-7-2004. and I have also a certificate issued by bank for stop payment on same day.

Please reply and THANKYOU  again.

Natwar raj purohit.

Even in that case, stop payment is before the date money is alleged to be advanced to you. Therefore, even if complainant claim to have received the cheque validly and not stolen, same was without consideration.

Call the bank officer as defense witness to prove the certificate and its contents.

In any case cheque has to be presented for payment within 6 months.

Sir, does this judgement mean that stop payment of the cheque with a good reason communicated to the bank cannot now be covered under 138 ?

please let us have your views

keyoor vaishnav

yes,      cannot  cover  under  138.

 For More and further knowledge and information Please consult with big experts like shashikumarji,  satyaprakashji ,   kirankumarji,  Hemant kumarji  ETC.

Thankyou for comunications.

Stop payment persay is not offense. Even the SC citations do not say so. All the requirements have to be complete.

A chair is on four legs , even one leg is missing the chair can not stand so is with NI 138.

if one stopped the cheque but amount is more than cheque issued then ?...............