Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2019 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 632 - DELHI HIGH COURTDishonor of Demand Draft - Recovery of debt - Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 - HELD THAT:- The fact of the matter is that in both FMPL and VIL had acted on demand drafts which were prepared on stolen draft leaves, and in respect of which, an FIR was lodged by UBI and on the basis of which a charge-sheet has also been prepared by the police and filed in the concerned Court. A copy of the said charge-sheet forms part of the record in both cases. It shows that in both instances the bank drafts were fraudulently prepared on stolen bank draft leaves. These were not valid instruments and could not have resulted in any valid credit being made in the accounts of either VIL or FMPL. The Bank i.e. UBI was simply not liable to honour such DDs. It transpires from the charge-sheet that this was an inter-state fraud committed by an organised gang and not in respect of just the two DDs in question, but several others which were fraudulently used for making payments. Counsel for the Petitioners have no answer to the query posed by Court as to whether if the payment had been made by using fake currency, which both Petitioners accepted bonafide, any valid credit could have been given in their accounts by the respective bankers, who may have accepted such currency without checking them first. The answer had to be in the negative. A fake currency, even if acted upon bonafide and given credit, could not have resulted in such credit being continued once the fraud was discovered. The principle can be no different in the instant case. The DRT and the DRAT were right in finding that UBI was entitled to recover the aforementioned sums claimed against the two Petitioners - Petition dismissed.
|