Provided signed blank cheque

and does court allows to replace my cheque with his one ? ----------- DO NOT EXPECT COURT TO BE A STOCK EXCHANGE LET YOUR BROTHER REFUND THE LOAN AND THERE WILL BE NO COURT MATTER------------- D=IT IS THE LENDER WHO HAS TO ACCEPTED REPLACEMENT OF SECURITY. IF YOUR BROTHER GIVES CHEQUE TODAY FOR THE AMOUNT THAT THE LENDER WANTS AND IF THE LENDER ACCEPT S THE SAME AND RETURNS YOUR CHEUQE (WHICH I BELIEVE WILL NOT HAPPEN) THE YOU ARE OUT OF PICTURE. ------------- IF THE LENDER IS WISE HE WILL NOT ENTER INTO THIS MUSICAL CHAIR.

Coming to his occupation he does nothing - he has too much of his parents property which is enjoying. Till date he does nothing as part of his career. --------------------- YOUR REPLY HAS CLOSED THE POSSIBILITY OF YOUR RESCUE WHICH WAS IN MY MIND.

SO BETTER RETURN HIS MONEY WITH INTEREST PREVALENT IN BANK AND LATER SUE YOUR BROTHER ON THE BASIS OF WHATEVER EVIDENCE HE HAS PROVIDED TO YOU.------------------------ IT IS YOUR CHOICE IF YOU WANT HARASSMENT FROM LENDER.

Thank you very much Sir, for the detailed explaination/suggestions.

Cheque law is short and strict.

 

Drawer of  the cheque  is liable even far others liability.

 

Complainant need not prove any thing once you accept that it was your cheque. There are very clear and specific recent judgments of higher courts in this matter.

 

 

However still there are many loop holes in the law and any accused can still  come out of cheque cases easily.

 

 

 

Our seniors who are expert in this line and conduct cases sucessfully on all India basis publish a weekly newspaper in which individual cases are discussed and analysed and proper perfect defense is shown.

I dont agree with line of action of Sudhir sir. 

Why should querist pay when he has not taken the money? The golden rule of law still is: Sticking to truth. 

 

If the querist is honest in his statements which we assume when some one asks quesiton on any forum, he should not give a damn to therats by some one.

The guy holding checque will have to answer many questions

1. Why he did not encash check . What was date of payment committed by borrower. Undated cheques have to be listed in agreement

2.How and when he made paymetns to drawer of cheque and why

3. Is there any written contract, message or witness

4. How querist is involved inn transaction. He has no written gurantee given or beneficiary of any transaction

The querist should file a police complaint against both his cousin and the lender for fraud and criminal conspiracy,  if he is truthful

Every cheque transaction has to be corroborated by some verifiable and logical event that took place between lender and borrower.

By this very argument, a buyer can stop payment a cheque which is given as advance and if buyer does not want to buy product/servcie before delivery. If some made to order transaction is doen, after stopping payment the buyer should intimate in writing to supplier that he is cancelling order and does not want to buy.

 

We should first understand spirit and objectives of enacting section 138 legislation for bouncing of cheques.It does not give blanket rights to any one 

Advocate Trilok gives excessive importance to Section 139. The section itself is against the normal principle "innocent until proved guilty". At first it is the Complainant who files the Complaint. In the Complaint he has to say why a cheque was issued to him and what was the liability. If the accused could successfully rebut the Complainant the judge will ask "then why at all did you issue the cheque in the first place". The accused should be able to satisfactorily answer that question. In this case the accused can answer that question easily if a large amount 20 lakhs or even 10 lakhs is claimed. The Complainant will have to explain transaction of such a large amount. Did he sell some goods or services to the accused of that value? Or if he says he paid that much amount, he will have to show bank transactions. He will have to prove his source of income for such a large amount. If he says he paid by cash he can get into trouble with the income-tax department.

We have told you so many times not to worry. The opposite party has weak case. I dont think his case will be sustainable in court even on first sight>just stick to truth. Thereis nothing in written

Why should querist pay when he has not taken the money? ------------ IT IS HIS PROMISE TO REFUND BY WAY OF SIGNING CHEQUE THAT HIS FRIENT LENT MONEY TO AN UNTRSUTWORTHY BROTHER OF HIM The golden rule of law still is: Sticking to truth.----------------- THE TRUTH IS THAT THE CREDITOR WOULD NOT HAVE LOS THIS MONEY HAD HE NOT PROMISED If the querist is honest in his statements which we assume when some one asks quesiton on any forum, he should not give a damn to therats by some one.----------------- THE LANGURE USED IS VERY GOOD----------- EXPLAINING 2+2=4 IS NOT A THREAT The guy holding checque will have to answer many questions

1. Why he did not encash check .-------------- HE CAN ENCASH OR GET IT BOUNCED IT NOW FILLING TODAYS DATE What was date of payment committed by borrower------------- THE DATE WHICH THE LENDER WILL NOW FILL ON THE CHEQUE Undated cheques have to be listed in agreement -------------- THE CHEQUE ITSELF IS AGREEMENT OR GUARANTEE 2.How and when he made paymetns to drawer of cheque and why-------------- THAT HE HIMSELF IS ADMITTING IT WAS PAID CASH, 3. Is there any written contract, message or witness---------------- THE CHEQUE ITSELF IS AGREEMENT 4. How querist is involved in transaction. --------------- HE IS INVOLVED BECAUSE OF HIS CONNIVANCE HIS BROTHER SUCCEEDED IN CHEATING THE CREDITOR He has no written gurantee given or beneficiary of any transaction------------ HE HIMSELF WHOTE A CHEQUE WHICH IS GUARANTEE THAT HE WILL PAY FOR HIS BROTHER WHOM THE LENDER CONSIDERED UNSTRUSTWORTHY

The querist should file a police complaint against both his cousin and the lender for fraud and criminal conspiracy,  if he is truthful --------------- NO HIS FRIEND SHOULD FILE A CRIMINAL CASE AGAINST HIM AND HIS BROTHER HE IS THE CHEATED PARTY NONE ELSE

Every cheque transaction has to be corroborated by some verifiable and logical event that took place between lender and borrower. ----------------- HE HAS HIMSELF RECORDED CONVERSATION TO PROVE THAT HIS FRIEND LENT MOLNEY ON THE STRENGHT OF HIS CHEQUE

By this very argument, a buyer can stop payment a cheque which is given as advance and if buyer does not want to buy product/servcie before delivery. If some made to order transaction is doen, after stopping payment the buyer should intimate in writing to supplier that he is cancelling order and does not want to buy.

 

-------------- HE HAS EXPLAINED NO BUYER SELLER EXPLANATION AND HE HAS ALSO STATED THAT THE LENDER IS UNEMPLOYED RICH YOUTH WE shouldfirst understand spirit and objectives of enacting section 138 legislation for bouncing of cheques. ----------- WE SHOULD ALSO UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT OF SECTION 415/420 OF IPC It does not give blanket rights to any one  --------------- IT DOE SNOT GIVE A BLANKET RIGHT TO SOMEONE TO WRITE CHEQUE AS A GUARANTEE OF PAYMENT TO OTHER PERSON AND THEN FEIGN BEING A STRANGER

IN ANY CASE HE CANNOT CLAIM S 20 LAKH HE CAN AT THE MOST CLAIM INTEREST ON PREVALENT BANK RATE.