Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws HC Indian Laws - HC This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property/ Transactions Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Indian Laws - High Court - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 9297 Records

More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote and Decision etc.

• 2022 (6) TMI 1209
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - acquittal of acused - presumption of innocence - prepoderance of probablities - scope of interference in acquittal appeals - Section 138 of NI Act - HELD THAT:- It is well settled by catena of decisions that an appellate Court has full power to review, re-appreciate and consider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. However, the Appellate Court must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is prejudice in favour of the accused, firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court. In t....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1208
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - existence of legally enforceable debt or not - acquittal of the accused - presumption of innocence - Section 138 of NI Act - HELD THAT:- In the case under NI Act, the cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability. Further, explanation to this section defines the debt and other liability to mean a legally enforceable debt or other liability. In this context, after due appreciation and evaluation of the evidence on record, the learned trial Judge has come to a conclusion that the debt in question cannot be said to be legally enforceable debt and the complainant has failed to prove otherwise. It is observed by the learned trial Judge that in the pres....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1207
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - legally enforceable debt or not - validity of confirmation of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - rebuttal of presumption - HELD THAT:- In the instant case, though a presumption about existence of legally enforceable debt was initially formed in favour of the complainant under Section 139 of the N.I.Act, however, the accused by eliciting several statements in the cross-examination of PW1 in his favour and also leading evidence by examining four witnesses from his side, could able to successfully make this court to suppose that no consideration and debt existed. Thus, the presumption formed in favour of the complainant was successfully rebutted by the accused. Once the presumption formed in favour of the complainant stands rebutted, the onus would be upon th....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1173
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - material alteration in the cheque - acquittal of the accused - contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner (accused) is that, the cheque at Ex. P-1 has been materially altered, without the notice or consent of the drawer of the cheque, as such, the instrument has become invalid - HELD THAT:- In the instant case, the alteration in the cheque at Ex. P-1 has been admitted by none else than the drawee Bank Manager in his evidence as DW-1. Though it was not elicited from him about the nature of the said alteration, however, he has identified the said alteration as an alteration in the date of the cheque. In the date column, the year appears to have been manipulated and appears to have been postponed the time of payment. Thus, undoubtedly, it is a material alteration in the cheque - Section 87 of the N.I. Act which....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1172
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - vicarious liability - It is alleged that the accused knowing it well that there is no sufficient fund in the account still issued the cheques and made himself liable u/s 138 of N.I.Act - HELD THAT:- The Court has gone through the materials on record and finds that in the complaint the firm is not made an accused. On perusal of the cheques which have been brought on the record by way of I.A petition it transpires that the cheque in question was issued by the firm and the petitioner is not a drawer in both the cases. On perusal of this section, it is crystal clear that vicarious liability under sub section 1 or 2 of section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be fastened if the person is having the control over the day to day affairs of the company. Looking to the explanation of the said s....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1171
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - funds insufficient - offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act - HELD THAT:- The evidence of PW-1, which has remained un-denied, supported by the cheque at Ex.P-1 and the banker's endorsement at Ex.P-2, which shows that there was no sufficient balance in the account of the drawer/accused on the date when the cheque was presented for its realisation and also the copy of legal notice at Ex.P-3 and the postal acknowledgement at Ex.P-5, which further go to show that the complainant had demanded the payment of cheque amount from the accused within the statutory period, but, still the accused did not pay the cheque amount, would make it clear that the complainant has proved the alleged guilt against the accused beyond reasonable doubt - both the trial Court, as well as the Sessions Judge's Court have convicte....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1170
  
  Enforceability of part of the Foreign Award - Seeking declaration of enforceability under Sections 47 and 49 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 (the Arbitration Act) of a final award - seeking declaration that the Foreign Award be deemed to be a decree of this Court - HELD THAT:- One part of the Foreign Award grants the claims made by the Company. By the other part of the Foreign Award, the counter claim of NCCIHL towards part consideration for the Subsequent Sale Shares was directed to be paid by TAQA/the Respondent herein. In addition, the Foreign Award provided for the payment of costs by both the claimants to NCC. By these petitions, the respective Petitioner seeks enforcement of the part of the Foreign Award which is in favour of the respective Petitioner against TAQA. TAQA/ the Respondent is a company based in Cuddalore, a....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1131
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - Insufficiency of fund - Legally enforceable debt or not - acquittal of the accused - preponderance of probablities - failure to discharge the fundamental burden of proving his capacity to advance loan - Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. - HELD THAT:- The consistent defence of the petitioner eversince he received the statutory notice from the complainant/respondent is that there was no privity of contract and the cheque was not given to the complainant to discharge any legally enforceable debt and further, the complainant has no source of income to advance Rs.9 lakhs. When a specific defence raised by the accused person at the inception itself even before filing the complaint, the complainant is bound to explain in his complaint regarding the source of income. Failure to explain his source of income is fatal to the compla....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1130
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - signing of cheque jointly - vicarious liability u/s 141 of NI Act - insufficiency of funds - acquittal of the accused - existence of legally enforceable debt or not - HELD THAT:- This court finds force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that, at no point of time, allegation, if any, with regard to advancement of loan to the petitioners ever came to be leveled rather, the complainant specifically stated in the complaint that in March, 2016, he on the request of accused Rishi Rana advanced him loan to the tune of Rs. 5.00 Lakh for his domestic use. There is not even a whisper in the complaint that the loan to the tune of Rs. 5.00 Lakh was advanced to some firm or other partners of accused Rishi Rana. It is only after conclusion of evidence, that the complainant filed an application under S. 319 CrP....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1129
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - rebuttal of presumption - Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - HELD THAT:- It cannot be ignored of the fact that the learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the judgment of conviction but his grievance is only about the quantum of sentence, as such also, the impugned judgments of conviction under revision does not warrant any interference at the hands of this court so far as the conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, is concerned. Though the accused has attempted to rebut the presumption formed in favour of the complainant and in which process, he has entered witness box and produced certain documents, however, he could not successfully rebut the presumption. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the qu....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1035
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - amicable settlement of disputes between the parties - compounding of the offence - Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act - HELD THAT:- Taking into consideration the fact that the matter, which led to filing of the criminal case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, now stands settled between the parties and as per directions of the Court, 5% of the cheque amount has already been deposited by the petitioner as compounding fee with HP State Legal Services Authority, Shimla, this Court orders the compounding of the offence in question. The petition as well as application filed for compounding of the offence stand disposed of.

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1034
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - insufficient funds - proclaimed offender - Section 31(2) of the Partnership Act - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the view that when a complaint is filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, primarily the cause of action arises from the issuance and dishonour of the cheque which may be issued by one party to the other party to discharge the liability which it owes to the other party. The issue of the liability if any existing, in lieu whereof the cheque has been issued, is a triable issue which the learned Trial Court decides during the course of the trial. In the present case, though there is no dispute that the petitioners were inducted as partners of the firm on 10th February, 2011, but fact of the matter remains that the cheque, dishonour of which has led to filing of the complaint under Section 138 of th....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1033
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - Whether in the appeal preferred by the accused the Appellate Court can enhance the punishment by awarding compensation which the trial Court has conspicuously omitted to award and the complainant had not preferred any appeal seeking compensation? - HELD THAT:- Sub Section (1) of Section 357 of Cr.P.C. which empowers the Court to order part or whole of the fine amount pay to the person who sustained loss and Sub-Section (4) of Section 357 of Cr.P.C., specifically say thus power may be exercised also by the Appellate Court and Court of revision, such exercise of power by the Appellate Court subject to Section 386(b)(iii) of Cr.P.C. only. Examine the wordings of Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, no doubt fine can be imposed twice the amount of the cheque. In exercise of power under Sectio....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1032
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - vicarious liability of Director - Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - HELD THAT:- On perusing the complaint, this Court finds that the complainant has made specific averment that the Directors participated in the meeting to negotiate the terms of contract and at every stage, they enquired about the project and insisted to complete it within the scheduled time. The petitioners admit that the cheque was drawn by them and handed over to the respondent-complainant. However, they contend that the cheques were issued only as security for the balance amount, which is liable to pay after certification. If that is so, the petitioners ought not to have given those cheques with specific dates and amounts without certification. After presentation of the cheques and institution of the complaint, the petitioners h....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1031
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - Section 138 of NI Act - HELD THAT:- It is seen that both the courts below have rightly held that the second respondent/complainant has established the guilt of the revision petitioners/accused under Section 138 of the Act. The reasoning assigned by the courts below in support of its findings in favour of the second respondent/ complainant and against the revision petitioners/accused, is fully justified and there is no perversity or illegality. The courts below have rightly appreciated the evidence and materials and applied the legal aspects in proper perspective and in accordance with the settled legal position. There are no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Courts below with regard to the conviction and sentence. No interference is warranted in this regard. There is no merit in the revision and the same is liable to be dismissed. The criminal revision case is dismissed.

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1030
  
  Validity of suit promissory notes - material alteration with reference to the year material alteration with reference to the year mentioned in Exs. A1 to A4 - HELD THAT:- 'Material alteration' literally means an alteration made to an instrument that adds or deletes any provision or changes the rights and obligations of any party under it. 'Material alteration' in negotiable instrument means, any change in written instrument which makes it to speak different legal language from that of the original, that includes altering the date of instrument. The trial Court observed that nothing incriminating evidence was extracted from CW. 1 by the plaintiff to discredit her assertions on material alteration to year of execution of promissory notes marked as Exs. A1 to A4. Having regard to the evidence brought on record, the trial Cour....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 1029
  
  Compounding of offences - HELD THAT:- The case is ordered to be listed after four weeks, and in the meanwhile, the petitioner, as prayed for, may file an application praying for compounding of the offence, subject to deposition of 5% of the cheque amount with State Legal Services Authority within the same period. List on 06.07.2022.

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 970
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - complaint was dismissed without taking cognizance - no notice was issued to complainant - insufficiency of funds - acquittal of the accused - rebuttal of presumption - HELD THAT:- The present complaint is by a private party for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant is not a public servant. Therefore, presence of the complainant and his/her examination on oath is absolutely necessary before taking the complaint on file. Since the complainant was absent on 12.11.2021, he was called absent and the court finding that the complainant is not interested to proceed with the case further, had dismissed the complaint under Section 256 Cr.P.C. - The dismissal of the complaint can be made only after the same is taken on file. In the instant case, it appears that the learned Ma....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 910
  
  Dishonor of Cheque - validity of cheque - application filed by the petitioner/accused to examine the fingerprint and handwriting expert has been dismissed - HELD THAT:- The application in question had been moved for examining the fingerprint and handwriting expert to compare the handwriting of the signatures and the handwriting in which the remaining particulars of the cheque were filled in as the ink used in affixing signatures on the cheque in question was different from the ink used in filling the remaining particulars of the cheque in question. The response of the complainant therein was that a complaint was filed on 10.10.2014 and the application had been moved after almost five years on 24.07.2019 with a view to delay the trial one way or the other. A perusal of the judgments in T. Nagappa [2008 (4) TMI 789 - SUPREME COURT], would c....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (6) TMI 909
  
  Scope of the Drawer or Maker or acceptor under Negotiable instrument act - recovery from the surety - Recovery of amount jointly and severally, from the first and second Defendants together with interest at 18% per annum on the principal sum - allegation is that the first Defendant repeatedly engaged in fraudulent activities by taking delivery of goods and not paying for the same - HELD THAT:- In the absence of a contract to the contrary (see added emphasis in Section 37 supra), in the context of a bill of exchange, only the drawer until acceptance, and the acceptor thereafter is liable as principal debtor. If this provision is read with Section 33, only the drawee, including a person named in the bill as a drawee for need, or an acceptor for honour are liable as principal debtors. Any other party to the bill would be liable only as suret....... + More

  ---

12345........ 465