Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2016 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 1627 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - seeking leave to appeal - it was alleged that cheque was as security cheque - discharge of the existing legal liability, on the account that the cheque being of higher amount - HELD THAT:- On the basis of evidence adduced by the parties, it was concluded that cheque amount was much more than the actual amount due, therefore, cheque was not in discharge of a legal liability. Trial court has meticulously scrutinized evidence adduced by the parties and on the basis thereof has held that, as per the loan agreement Ex. CW1/B, petitioner had advanced ₹ 42,600/-. As agreed the interest of ₹ 14,400/- was also payable. Thus, total amount payable in instalments was ₹ 57,000/-. CW1 admitted in his cross-examination that respondent no. 2 had already paid about ₹ 40,000/- to petitioner. Statement of account Ex. CW1/1 indicated that as on 16th February, 2009 ₹ 17,100/- was outstanding balance. Over and above this, overdue charges of ₹ 12,451.48 were added. Even the aggregate of this amount comes to ₹ 29,551.48; whereas cheque amount was much more than this. Thus, the cheque being of higher amount could not be taken towards discharge of the existing legal liability. Reliance has been placed on the judgments, that is, ALLIANCE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT PVT. LTD. AND ORS. VERSUS VINAY MITTAL [2010 (1) TMI 1288 - DELHI HIGH COURT] to conclude that if cheque amount is much more than liability, section 138 of the Act is not attracted. The petitioner has failed to make out a case for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of the trial court - petition dismissed.
|