|
Advanced Search Options
Indian Laws - High Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 6793 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 & Decision etc.
- 2021 (1) TMI 856 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Benefit of grant of regularization and other service benefits - non-fulfilment of conditions as per the Recruitment Rules of MTS that is with regard to the age - HELD THAT:- In order to attract the contempt of the courts, the order should be very specific and clear in terms as we have noted above, the CAT has not directed the regularization of the respondent herein, but only directed for consideration of the representation of respondent herein. The said direction has been strictly complied and the application of the respondent has been considered and a considered order has been passed as noted supra. Therefore, if at all the respondent is aggrieved by the order passed by the petitioner No.1 herein dated 31.08.2018 as per Annexure-G, he ought to have challenged the said order and in that context the Tribunal may get an opportunity to exami....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 855 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Dishonor of cheque - pre-trial before the actual trial begins - rebuttal of presumption - Sections 118, 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act - HELD THAT:- It is manifestly clear that a dishonour would constitute an offence only if the cheque is returned by the bank ''unpaid' either because the amount of money standing to the credit of the drawer's account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that the amount exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement with that bank. Now, for an offence under Section 138 NI Act, it is essential that the cheque must have been issued in discharge of legal debt or liability by accused on an account maintained by him with a bank and on presentation of such cheque for encashment within its period of validity, the cheque must have been returned unpaid. The ....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 854 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Scope of the bar of cognizance imposed under Section 439(2) of the Act of 2013 - Section 439(2) of Act of 2013 and Section 19(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act are in pari materia with each other or not - proceedings against the directors of a company and/or the company under Section 439(2) of the Act of 2013. Whether the application in IA No.2/2020 under Order VI Rule 16 of CPC is required to be allowed? - HELD THAT:- The averments made and the documents produced therein cannot be said to prejudice or delay the matter inasmuch as the above petition having been filed on 4.08.2020, the respondent having entered appearance and filed its objections on 3.10.2020, the above matter was taken up on 20.11.2020, 2.12.2020, 14.12.2020, 17.12.2020, 18.12.2020, when it did not reach on account of paucity of time, it was however taken up for hearing ....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 853 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - error apparent on the face of record or not - offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act - HELD THAT:- This Court did not notice any error apparent on record with the well reasoned orders of the learned Magistrate and the learned First Appellate Court. Suffice to say that, though under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, the Court is entitled to order for double the cheque amount as fine and imprisonment for two years, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, the learned Magistrate awarded fine of ₹ 39,000/-, out of which, ₹ 37,000/- was ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant along with imprisonment of six months. In the considered opinion of the Court, awarding simple imprisonment for a period of six months is not supported by valid reasons. Therefore, to that ex....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 852 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - seeking permission to compound the offence under Section 147 of the N.I Act and also reporting the settlement of the matter between the parties - HELD THAT:- The parties have settled the matter out of their own volition with free consent and keeping their mutual interest under consideration, as such, they may be permitted to compound the offence under Section 147 of the N.I. Act. Section 147 of N.I. Act has made every offence punishable under the N.I. Act as compoundable. As such, there is no bar for the parties in the proceeding to compound the offence - However, at the same time the guidelines laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H [2010 (5) TMI 380 - SUPREME COURT] regarding imposing graded cost on litigant also to be borne in mind - According to the said Judgment in Damodar S. ....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 851 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - defence taken by the accused is that while he was proceeding in a Car, he met with an accident, wherein he lost the cheques and one of those cheques have been mis-used by the complainant - Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Whether the finding recorded by the learned Magistrate that accused has committed an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act confirmed by the first Appellate Court is erroneous? - HELD THAT:- It is the accused who has taken the contention that there is a material alteration in Ex.P-1. It was required for the accused to make an application seeking necessary orders to refer the Ex.P-1 for hand-writing expert. No such application is filed by the accused before the learned Magistrate or atleast before the first Appellate Court. All along, the accused tried to impress upo....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 803 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - Respondent had not repaid the amount despite receipt of notice and neither did he reply to the said legal notice - acquittal of accused - Rebuttal of presumption - Whether the appellant has proved the guilt of accused thereby warranting a conviction of the respondent? - HELD THAT:- This Court will have to adjudicate on the theory putforth by the respondent as to a theory which is probable in defence and whether the same has been accepted and admitted by the appellant. When respondent tries to disprove the version of appellant he cannot merely make a statement of denial or posing certain suggestions that he does not owe any money to the appellant. The burden cast on the respondent is so heavy in view of the presumption under section 139 of the Act that while raising the probable defence it has ....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 706 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Seeking grant of regular bail - recovery of contraband from a vehicle in transit - tablets of Clovidol-100-SR (Tramadol) - tablets of Clovidol-100-SR (Tramadol) - Wincerex - HELD THAT:- It is a case where pursuant to receipt of secret information, the police intercepted a car in which the petitioner and one Sanju Singh were found travelling and search of which led to recovery of 23,500 tablets of Clovidol-100-SR (Tramadol) and another 17,000 tablets of Clovidol-100-SR (Tramadol) apart from 200 vials 100 ml each of Wincerex. Section 42 of the Act pertaining to power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant or authorisation. The material question would be as to whether it is the procedure mandated under Section 42 of the Act which would be applicable or as to whether Section 43 of the Act alone will apply in such cases of recove....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 661 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - service of notice - Refusal of notice - endorsement of refusal by the postal peon was dated 10.04.07 while notice refused on 2.4.07 - case of petitioner is is that the Complaint itself was premature and not maintainable, inasmuch as, the statutory period for filing the Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 had not expired - HELD THAT:- This court finds that there is nothing on record, neither documentary or oral evidence, as to what happened on 02.04.2007 when the postal peon went to deliver the notice and as to whether he met the accused and whether on the same day the accused refused to accept the notice. Admittedly, the postal peon has not been examined as a witness and the postal envelope has a specific endorsement of refusal with a date as 10.04.2007. Thus, finding of the learned low....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 626 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Maintainability of petition - right to prefer an appeal - condonation of delay application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act - Dishonor of cheque - Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act - HELD THAT:- As per section 148 of NI Act, A minimum of 20% of the compensation amount may be directed to be paid at the time of hearing of the appeal. Thus, fixing 50% of the compensation amount as a pre-condition for hearing of the application and the appeal was not an absolute imperative. It has to be remembered that the right of appeal of a convict is too precious to be thwarted by technical embargoes, that too discretionary ones. As such, so far as the direction to pay 50% of the compensation amount is concerned, the same ought to be suitably modified. In the present case, during pendency of this revision, the Learned Appellate Court has ....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 625 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - acquittal of accused - offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - the trial Court came to the conclusion that the complainant failed to establish the ingredients of Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the trial Court held that in view of material alterations of cheque-Ex. P1, Section 87 of the N.I. Act renders the same instrument as void and Ex. P1-cheque is materially altered - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that complainant is seeking to recover an amount of ₹ 4,00,000/- from society namely Sasya Shyamala Souharda Credit Co-operative Limited. Complainant has not made society as party, accused in the complaint. Though trial Court has dismissed the case and discharged accused No. 2, no challenge is made to such dismissal of case against accused No. 2. Nevertheless, accused No. 1/respondent....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 624 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - Rebuttal of presumption - trial Court came to the conclusion that appellant utterly failed to prove the guilt of accused beyond all reasonable doubt to the satisfaction of the Court - offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and section 139 of NI Act - HELD THAT:- The primary requirement is the existence of any debt or liability and that the said debt has to be legally enforceable debt. Therefore, it is stated that when any cheque is drawn by a person on account maintained by him with Bank for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for discharge in whole in part, of any debt or other liability is returned by the Bank unpaid, in such situations, the provision under this section will come into play. Therefore, the primary requirement w....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 566 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - acquittal of accused - appellant submitted that the Trial Court after appreciating the evidence on record had convicted respondent no.2accused for the alleged offence under the said Act, which has been reversed by the Appellate Court by misinterpreting the evidence and solely on the ground that the respondent no.2accused had deposited ₹ 2,00,000/ towards compensation, interest and cost - HELD THAT:- It would be beneficial to refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of M/S. METERS AND INSTRUMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. VERSUS KANCHAN MEHTA [2017 (10) TMI 218 - SUPREME COURT], whereby it has been observed by the Supreme Court that though the compounding of offence requires consent of both the parties, even in absence of such consent, the Court, in the interest of justice, on being ....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 439 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of cheque - acquittal of accused - only defence taken is that the accused has given the said cheque in favour of one Krishnappa while availing loan of ₹ 30,000/- for him and the same has been misused - HELD THAT:-It is the specific case of the complainant that notice was sent through UCP was served and through out the cross- examination of PW.1, nothing is elicited with regard to non-service of notice sent through UCP. Though he denies the address, claiming that till 2004, he was residing in the address mentioned in the complaint but in the cross-examination, he categorically admits that his wife residing in the said address and any notice sent to that address his wife would intimate the same. The first contention that no notice was served on him cannot be accepted for the answer elicited from the mouth of DW.1 and notice s....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 438 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - funds insufficient - post dated cheque - legally enforceable debt or not - acquittal of the accused - the accused in this case has contended that cheque in question was a post dated cheque issued for security purposes only - Whether the complainant has made out all the ingredients of Sec.138 of N.I.Act to prove the guilt of the accused person? - HELD THAT:- accused admitted his signature on cheque and its issuance to complainant. Consequently presumption under Section 118 and 139 of N.I. Act would be available to complainant - In this case, accused has not led his evidence. The reasons assigned by the trial Court that complainant failed to prove the particulars of seizure of vehicle of accused, its sale to third party, the amount received from such sale coupled with the contention that cheque issued was a post dated c....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 380 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - acquittal of the accused - rebuttal of presumption - burden to prove - it is contended that the Trial Judge has committed an error in coming to the conclusion that the burden is on the complainant to establish the case against the accused beyond doubt - HELD THAT:- It is settled law that once the cheque is admitted and there is no dispute with regard to the signature and so also notice was issued, the Court has to draw mandatory presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act. No doubt, in the case on hand, the accused has given reply denying the issuance of the cheque. But in the cross-examination of D.W.1, he categorically admits that he issued the cheques and the contents of Ex.P1 cheques in both the cases are also written by him. It has to be noted that P.W.1 in the cross-examination admits that he filled up the con....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 339 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - expert opinion for cross-examination of cheques, sought - It is contended that the expert opinion would have aided the petitioner in setting up rebuttal evidence - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the petitioner had executed Exhibit P14 agreement acknowledging the liability and had entered the particulars of the cheques issued towards discharge of the liability in that document. The petitioner has not disputed his signature in the agreement. Further, the petitioner has not disputed his signature in the cheques or the amount entered in words. Therefore, as rightly found by the learned Magistrate, no purpose would be served by sending the cheques for expert opinion, other than delaying the trial unnecessarily. Application dismissed.
- 2021 (1) TMI 307 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Grant of Bail - Dishonor of Cheque - Cheating - According to complainant, as and when she had been visiting for training at Gurgaon, petitioner, who was posted at Gurgaon at that time, had been booking Hotel for her, but at the time of issuance of bill, on advise of the petitioner, she had been taking bill in the name of one person only whereas petitioner had been keeping bills having details of two persons with him and later on petitioner had made a complaint in the Company for claiming amount on the basis of wrong bills and petitioner had started to threaten her - HELD THAT:- At this stage, petitioner is entitled for bail. The petition is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail under Sections 376, 506 and 417 IPC, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹ 1,00,000/- with two sureties, one of which shall be l....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 306 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - acquittal of the accused - main contention of the complainant in this appeal is that the Trial Judge failed to consider the evidence of PWs.1 and 2 and also the principles laid down in the judgments referred in the grounds of appeal and also failed to take note of accused Nos.1 and 2 have not entered into the witness box to rebut the evidence of the complainant - HELD THAT:- This Court has to re-appreciate the material available on record. The present appeal is filed against the order of acquittal. This Court has to re-appreciate the material on record and arrive for a conclusion whether the trial Judge has considered the material available on record or not. This Court also given anxious consideration to the principles laid down in the Judgments referred supra both by Complainant's Counsel and accused Counsel. In ....... + More
- 2021 (1) TMI 305 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dishonor of Cheque - quantum of sentence of imprisonment - section 138 of NI Act - HELD THAT:- The revision petitioner / accused had made a voyage of two rounds before the Trial Court and the Sessions Judge's Court in the matter and prior to the remanding of the matter by the Sessions Judge's Court and subsequent to the remand of the matter also he was convicted and the same was confirmed. Therefore, the accused apart from not pleading guilty under Section 252 Cr.P.C. has made futile exercise from the year 2000 till date in proving his alleged innocence towards the alleged offence but he has failed in his repetitive attempts. There are no reasons for setting aside the sentence of imprisonment in toto. Considering the fact that at the earliest point of time when he was convicted for the first time in the same case by the Trial Cour....... + More
........
|
