9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as available from the material placed on record, it is the respondent's case that the petitioner and respondent had been friends and had known each other for about 15 years. Subsequently, on account of some financial difficulty, the petitioner took a friendly loan of Rs.20,00,000/- from the respondent with a promise to repay the same once her financial crisis was over. The loan was given by the respondent vide cheque No.901078 dated 10.09.2013 drawn on State Bank of India, Saraswati Vihar, C-Block, Delhi. The petitioner, in discharge of her debt/liability, issued a cheque bearing No. 023892 dated 08.06.2016 drawn on HDFC Bank, Pusa Road, Bazar Marg, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi amounting to Rs.20,00,000/-. The said cheque, when presented for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mits that the petitioner was liable to pay the aforementioned amount, having taken the same as a friendly loan, with a promise to repay. It is further submitted that the statutory notice dated 02.07.2016 was sent to the petitioner however, she refused to receive the same and thus, it would be deemed that the petitioner was duly served. 6. Before proceeding further, let me recapitulate the legal position involved in the present case. Prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act requires the following conditions to be satisfied:- "i) that the cheque is drawn by a person and on an account maintained by him with a banker; ii) for the payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom an account jointly in the name of the Arvind Gupta and Neeta Gupta (petitioner herein) however, it is a matter of fact that the said cheque is not signed by the petitioner. 9. In the present fact situation, the observations of the Supreme Court in Aparna A. Shah v. Sheth Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (2013) 8 SCC 71 hold value. While dealing with a similar issue wherein the appellant, being a joint account holder, was sought to be proceeded against, it was observed:- "xxx 28. We also hold that under Section 138 of NI Act, in case of issuance of cheque from joint accounts, a joint account-holder cannot be prosecuted unless the cheque has been signed by each and every person who is a joint account-holder. The said principle is an exce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
