Funds insufficient Archives

Can only a sole proprietor be held liable under S. 138 NI Act for dishonour of cheque drawn on account of sole proprietorship concern? Tis Hazari Court decodes

Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi: While deciding a matter under Section 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Devanshu Sajlan, MM-05 (NI

Case Briefs District Court

Court holds accused guilty under S. 138 NI Act where he failed to rebut statutory presumption even when complainant didn’t produce documentary evidence to prove debt

XVIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: Manjunatha, XVII Addl. C.M.M., found the accused guilty for the offence under Section 138 of

Case Briefs District Court

Dishonour of Cheque | Not filling details in cheque, Non-filing of ITR by complainant, Handing over cheque as security, etc.: Delhi Court discards all defence, orders conviction under S. 138 NI Act

Saket Courts, Delhi: Swati Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate (South) NI Act, convicted the accused for an offence under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque)

Case Briefs High Courts

All HC reiterates scope of inherent powers to quash a S. 138 NI Act complaint. Imposes exemplary costs for filing petition as an after thought

Allahabad High Court: Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J., refused to exercise and inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash a complaint

Case Briefs High Courts

All HC | Can factum of disputed service of notice in S. 138 NI Act case be adjudicated under S. 482 CrPC? HC elaborates

Allahabad High Court: Vivek Varma, J., held that factum of disputed service of notice requires adjudication on the basis of evidence and

Case Briefs High Courts

Del HC | Proceedings under S. 138 NI Act quashed against Independent Non-executive Directors not involved in day-to-day affairs of Company

Delhi High Court: Manoj Kumar Ohri, J., while allowed the present petition and quashed the impugned order summoning the petitioners under Section 138

Case Briefs High Courts

Leave to defend denied in light of frivolous and vexatious defence

Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Valmiki Mehta, J. dismissed a regular first appeal filed under Section 96 CPC

Case Briefs High Courts

A complaint is not to be dismissed under Section 256 CrPC for non-appearance of the complainant due to unavoidable circumstances

Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Chander Bhushan Barowalia, J. allowed a criminal appeal filed under Section 378