Skip to content


Options Dock ▼

Judgment Search Results Home > Search Phrase: negotiable instruments act 1881 section 17 Court: supreme Page 1 of about 11,783 results (0.063 seconds)

Apr 19 2012 (SC)

Brij Mohan Lal Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... concerned authorities.111. to take an example, in 1988 the legislature amended the provisions of the negotiable instruments act, 1881, inserting chapter xvii (section 138to section 142) by the amending act 66 of 1988. again, vide the amending act 55 of 2002, the punishment prescribed under section 138 of that act was amended and the period of notice was also reduced to 15 days from the one ..... have been directed to particular sectors and with conditional ties that restrict the expenditure options of the states. in our assessment, grants-in- aid are an important instrument which enable the commission to make its scheme of transfers more comprehensive and address various issues spelt out in the tor. grants also allow us to make corrections ..... the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. the doctrine of separation of powers demarcates the area of their respective operation. normally, the government exercises various controls over its instrumentalities and the organizations involved in the governance of the state. this would be through financial, administrative or managerial and functional controls. these parameters of control may be applied to ..... month period prescribed earlier. these amendments resulted in filing of unexpected number of cases in the courts of the learned magistrate. as per the 213th law commission report, the pendency in 2008 of section 138 cases .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 2001 (SC)

Punjab and Sindh Bank Vs. Vinkar Sahakari Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2001VIIAD(SC)537; AIR2001SC3641; 2001(4)ALLMR(SC)474; 2002(1)ALT(Cri)55; [2001]107CompCas208(SC); (2001)4CompLJ188(SC); 2002CriLJ93; JT2001(8)SC22; 2001MPLJ580(SC); RLW2001

..... .this case involves a queer situation when a 'pay order' was dishonoured by the drawer bank. the holder thereof (punjab and sindh bank) filed a complaint under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881 (for short 'the act'). the drawer bank and its officials have been arraigned as accused in the complaint. but a single judge of the high court of bombay quashed the complaint ..... either as a promissory note or as a bill of exchange, law has given the option to the holder to treat it as he chooses. this can be discerned from section 17 of the act which says 'where an instrument may be construed either as a promissory note or bill of exchange, the holder may at his election treat it as either and the ..... said observation was made in the wake of the contention that the collecting bank could claim protection under section 131 of the act. the said decision of the bombay high court cannot hold good because the negotiable instruments act was amended by incorporating section 131a in the said act.17.that apart, learned single judge while relying on the decisions of the house of lords in capital and ..... counties bank vs. gordon (supra) restricted himself to the former limb of the observation therein. it is in the latter limb that the house of lords said that when the draft is in possession of a holder the instrument .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 08 2008 (SC)

Aneeta Hada Vs. Godfather Travels and Tours Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2008(3)ALLMR(SC)881; 2008(3)CTC840; 2008(8)SCALE25; [2008]85SCL56(SC)

..... also cited k. seetharam reddy v. k. radhika rani, (2002) 112 comp cas 204 (ap) in support of his arguments. it is held in the said decision that "section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881, leaves no doubt that the person who has drawn the cheque on his account is alone liable in the event the cheque drawn by him is dishonoured". in the ..... respondent company had business transactions. appellant on behalf of the company issued a cheque dated 17.1.2001 for a sum of rs.5,10,000/- in favour of respondent which was dishonoured. respondent filed a complaint petition against the appellant under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881 ('the act' for short). the company which is a juristic person was not arrayed as an accused ..... . the learned magistrate took cognizance of the offence against her. respondent had not even served any notice upon the company in terms of section 138 of the act. it served a notice only on the ..... light of the above dictum also, i find that neither first accused- society nor petitioner, as secretary of the society can be proceeded against for offence under section 138 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 2010 (SC)

Mandvi Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. Nimesh B. Thakore

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2010(1)BomCR614; JT2010(1)SC259; 2010(I)OLR(SC)306; 2010(1)SCALE188; (2010)3SCC83; [2010]98SCL139(SC); 2010(1)LC454(SC)

..... which those provisions were brought into existence by making amendments in the negotiable instruments act, 1881. the negotiable instruments act was amended first by the banking public financial institutions and negotiable instruments laws (amendment) act, 1988 and a second time by the negotiable instruments (amendment and miscellaneous provisions) act, 2002. the first amendment inserted chapter xvii in the act, comprising sections 138 to 143. section 138 made, for the first time in the legislative history of the ..... a view to encourage the culture of use of cheques and enhancing the credibility of the instrument. the existing provisions in the negotiable instruments act, 1881, namely, sections 138 to 142 in chapter xvii have been found deficient in dealing with dishonour of cheques. not only the punishment provided in the act has proved to be inadequate, the procedure prescribed for the courts to deal with such matters ..... 's slip would be prima facie evidence of certain facts and section 147 made the offences under the act compoundable.14. the statement of objects and reasons appended to the bill stated as follows:the negotiable instruments act, 1881 was amended by the banking, public financial institutions and negotiable instruments laws (amendment) act, 1988 wherein a new chapter xvii was incorporated for penalties in case of dishonour of cheques due .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 2010 (SC)

Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... 138 to 142 in chapter xvii have been found deficient in dealing with dishonour of cheques. not only the punishment provided in the act has proved to be inadequate, the procedure prescribed ..... be apt to clarify that in view of the non-obstante clause, the compounding of offences under the negotiable instruments act, 1881 is controlled by section 147 and the scheme contemplated by section 320 of the code of criminal procedure [hereinafter `crpccrpccrpc'] will not be applicable in the strict ..... section 147 `to make the offences under the act compoundable'. we can refer to the following extract from the statement of objects and reasons attached to the 2002 amendment which is self- explanatory:prefatory note - statement of objects and reasons. - the negotiable instruments act, 1881 was amended by the banking, public financial institutions and negotiable instruments laws (amendment) act, 1988 wherein a new chapter xvii ..... was incorporated for penalties in case of dishonour of cheques due to insufficiency of funds in the account of the drawer of the cheque. these provisions were incorporated with a view to encourage the culture of use of cheques and enhancing the credibility of the instrument. the existing provisions in the negotiable instruments act, 1881, namely, sections .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 2014 (SC)

Indian Bank Association and ors. Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... to 142 in chapter xvii have been found deficient in dealing with dishonour of cheques. not only the punishment provided in the act has proved to be inadequate, the procedure prescribed for the courts to deal with such matters ..... legislature inserted new sections 143 to 147 by the negotiable instruments (amendment and miscellaneous provisions) act, 2002, which is brought into force w.e.f. 6th february, 2003. the object and reasons for the said amendment act are of some importance and are given below :- 1. the negotiable instruments act, 1881 was amended by the banking, public financial institutions and negotiable instruments laws (amendment) act, 1988 wherein a new chapter xvii was incorporated ..... for penalties in case of dishonour of cheques due to insufficiency of funds in the account of the drawer of the cheque. these provisions were incorporated with a view to encourage the culture of use of cheques and enhancing the credibility of the instrument. the existing provisions in the negotiable instruments act,1881, namely, sections 138 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2012 (SC)

Msr Leathers. Vs. S. Palaniappan and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : (2013)1SCC177

..... not maintainable if no complaint based on an earlier dishonour, followed by the statutory notice issued on the basis thereof, had been filed.9. section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881, constituting chapter xvii of the act which was introduced by act 66 of 1988, inter alia, provides:138. dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account. where any cheque drawn by ..... brought up to this court by special leave. this court formulated the following question for determination:whether payee or holder of cheque can initiate proceeding of prosecution under section 138 of negotiable instrument act, 1881 for the second time if he has not initiated any action on earlier cause of action?3. answering the question in the negative this court held that a ..... t.s. thakur, j.1. in sadanandan bhadran v. madhavan sunil kumar (1998) 6 scc 514, this court was dealing with a case under section 138 of the negotiable instrument act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the act) in which the complainant had, after dishonour of a cheque issued in his favour, taken steps to serve upon the accused-drawer of the cheque a ..... notice under clause (b) of proviso to section 138 of the act. no complaint was, however, filed by the complainant despite failure of the accused to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 2007 (SC)

Dilip S. Dahanukar Vs. Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : [2007]137CompCas1(SC); 2007CriLJ2417; (2008)1GLR307; JT2007(6)SC204; 2008(1)MhLj22; 2007(11)OLR(SC)263; 2007(5)SCALE452; (2007)6SCC528

..... and representative at the trial, shall suffer s.i. for 1 month. the accused no. 2 mr. dilip s. dahanukar, stands convicted for the offence punishable under section 138 r.w. 141 of negotiable instruments act, 1881.the accused no. 2 is sentenced to suffer s.i. for 1 month.the accused no. 2 is also directed to pay compensation to the complainant, quantified (sic ..... ltd. and ors. v. union of india and ors. : air2004sc2371 , where the constitutionality of provisions of the securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act, 2002 were quested qua section 17(4) thereof, held: 'in view of the discussion already held in this behalf, we find that the requirement of deposit of 75% of the amount claimed before entertaining ..... an appeal (petition) under section 17 of the act is an oppressive, onerous and arbitrary condition against all the canons of reasonableness. such a condition is invalid and it is liable to be struck down.' 14. in transmission ..... till the disposal of the appeal, on payment of rs. 5 lacs within four weeks. call r & p. appellant be released on same bail.appellant to furnish fresh bail bond.17. we may also notice that appellant sought time for depositing the amount of compensation and also asked for the indulgence of the court for reduction of the said amount as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 2000 (SC)

Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd., Etc. Vs. Pennar Peterson Securities Ltd. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2000SC954; 2000CriLJ1464; 84(2000)DLT229(SC); [2000(85)FLR122]; JT2000(2)SC390; (2000)ILLJ1649SC; 2000(2)SCALE80; (2000)2SCC745

..... these appeals is whether a company and its directors can be proceeded against for having committed an offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881 (for short 'the ni actni actni act') after the company has been declared sick under the provisions of the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 (for short 'sica') before the expiry of the period for payment of the cheque amount. ..... that reason the appellants cannot be taken to have committed an offence under section 138 ni actni actni act. a bare reading of the section 22 of the sica makes the position clear that during pendency of an inquiry under section 16 or during the preparation of a scheme referred to under section 17 or during implementation of a sanctioned scheme or pendency of an appeal under ..... for the purposes of this section -(a) 'company' means any body corporate and includes a firm or other association of individuals; and(b) 'director', in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm.8. it is relevant to note here that chapter xvii of the ni actni actni act (sic) the aforementioned sections are included was inserted in the act w.e.f. 1.4 ..... .1989 by act 66 of 1988. the object of bringing section 138 on statute is to inculcate faith in the efficacy of banking operations and credibility a transacting .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 2003 (SC)

Goaplast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shri Chico Ursula D'Souza and Anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2003SC2035; 2003(1)ALD(Cri)877; 2003(2)ALLMR(SC)750; 2003(1)ALT(Cri)321; 2003(2)AWC1429(SC); [2003]114CompCas644(SC); (2003)2CompLJ275(SC); 2003CriLJ1723; (2003)2GLR1629

..... arun kumar, j.1. leave granted in all the appeals.2. these appeals involve a pure question of law as to applicability of section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'act') to a case in which a person issuing a post dated cheque stops its payment by issuing instructions to the drawee bank before the due date of payment. the facts ..... is necessary to refer to the object behind introduction of chapter xvii containing sections 138 to 142. this chapter was introduced in the act by the banking, public financial institutions and negotiable instruments laws (amendment) act, 1988 (acts 66 of 1998) with the object of inculcating faith in the efficacy of banking operations and giving credibility to negotiable instruments in business transactions and in order to promote efficacy of ..... can be rebutted by adducing evidence and the burden of proof is on the person who wants to rebut the presumption. this presumption coupled with the object of chapter xvii of the act which is to promote the efficacy of banking operation and to ensure credibility in business transactions through banks persuades us to take a view that by countermanding payment of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //