TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1849X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regarding the proposition that the notice issued under Section 138 of the NI Act has to be only for the cheque amount and not for any other amount more than the cheque amount. On an interpretation of clause(b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the NI Act the High Court held that there was no failure on the part of the respondent/complainant in making a demand for the payment of the amount of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR ORDER Leave granted. The appellant was acquitted by the Trial Court for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('NI Act') and sentenced to pay a fine of ₹ 40,000/-. The case of the complainant/respondent is that the appellant took a hand loan of ₹ 50,000/- with an assurance that he would return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n that the notices were contrary to Section 138 of the NI Act. The High Court took a different view and was of the opinion that there was no satisfactory evidence led by the appellant that the cheques in question were issued for the discharge of a legally enforceable debt. On an interpretation of clause(b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the NI Act the High Court held that there was no failure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the demand by the notice should be only the cheque amount and not the loan amount. A perusal of the notice, according to him, would show that the notice refers to the loan amount and not the cheque amount. He relied upon the judgments of this Court in the cases of Suman Sethi vs. Ajay K. Churwal Anr. (2000) 2 SCC 380, K.R. Indira vs. Dr. G. Adinarayana (2003) 8 SCC 301 and Rahul Builders v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
