Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2023 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 45 - HC - Indian LawsDishonour of Cheque - insufficient funds - Authorised signatory to sign the cheque - liability of drawer of cheque - HELD THAT:- This Court finds that the two cheques, which have come on record at Exhibit 22 and 23 goes to indicate that “Rameshkumar N. Agraval” has signed these cheques as Authorized Signatory of the Company namely Apar Steel and Casting Pvt. Ltd. Co. Thus, it has come on record that he is the authorized person in conduct of business of Apar Steel and Casting Pvt. Ltd. Co. Aforesaid cheques are dated 02.05.2015 and 15.04.2015, whereas the disputed cheque, which is placed on record vide Exhibit 8 is signed by “Rameshkumar N. Agraval” in his individual capacity is dated 25.03.2016. In case of MAINUDDIN ABDUL SATTAR SHAIKH VERSUS VIJAY D. SALVI [2015 (8) TMI 907 - SUPREME COURT], the Hon’ble Supreme Court inter alia held that from a bare reading of Section 138 of the NI Act the essential ingredient to attract the liability is that a person who is made liable should be drawer of the cheque and should have drawn the cheque on account maintained by him with the banker, for the payment of any amount of money to any person from out of that account, for discharge in whole or part of any debt or other liability. Thus, in the context of aforesaid provisions as well as the principle laid down, a person who draws a cheque on account maintained by him for paying to the payee is alone liable for the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act. In the facts of the case, prima facie, this Court in present appeal would like to examine the aforesaid aspect in context of the two cheques, which has been brought on record vide Exhibit 22 and 23. Hence, this application requires consideration - Leave to appeal is granted.
|