Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: negotiable instruments act Page 1 of about 28,829 results (0.129 seconds)

Nov 29 2001 (HC)

Atlaz Degi-tel Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Atlaz Technology Pvt. Ltd. and a ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2002(3)BomCR70; 2002BomCR(Cri)325

..... cannot be termed as 'any debt or other liability' as contemplated under section 138 of negotiable instruments act, 1881.in this context, a reference to section 139 of negotiable instrument act, 1881 as also section 118(a) of negotiable instruments act, 1881 will have to be made.section 139 of negotiable instruments act, 1881 reads as under:'139. presumption in favour of holder.---it shall be presumed, ..... proceedings to settle the dispute, criminal court is not competent to adjudicate the said matter by issuance of process for an offence punishable under section 138 of negotiable instruments act, 1881 act.(iii) the court of cjm at jalgaon has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and to take cognizance of the offence as, according to the petitioners ..... substance in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, that as the matter is referred to arbitrator, criminal proceedings under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act initiated by the respondent no. 1 are not maintainable and that jalgaon court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the said complaint.15. as regards the territorial jurisdiction ..... of no avail to the petitioners. in this regard, it is to be noted that in the above referred case criminal proceedings under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act for dishonour of cheque were already initiated against the accused, however, separate first information report under sections 406/420 of the indian penal code was also filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 2005 (HC)

Krishi Vikas Kendra Vs. Mukund and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : III(2007)BC542

..... only) so quantified shall also include expenses, interest, etc.25. this court, therefore, passes following order:(a) accused is convicted of offence punishable under section 138 of negotiable instruments act.(b) accused is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of two months. the order of sentence, shall be executable if payment of compensation is not done in due time by ..... , happened otherwise due to the erroneous approach of trial court.22. this court, therefore, holds the accused to be guilty of offence punishable under section 138 of negotiable instruments act.23. heard the learned advocate for accused on the point of sentence. learned advocate sirpurkar has argued in favour of lenient view and has shown readiness to pay ..... a bearer cheque. moreover, nature of cheque whether bearer or crossed has no bearing as to presumption which follows the act of drawing, negotiating, endorsing, transfer, etc., of any negotiable instrument, as well its date, etc. under section 118 of negotiable instruments act.(h) according to learned advocate mr. mundra, not only the judgment and order of acquittal is liable to be reversed ..... submissions:(a) the judgment is erroneous and calls for being reversed;(b) trial court framed questions in total erroneous manner and contrary to the scheme of the negotiable instruments act;(c) the trial court should have formulated the question as to whether the complainant proves that accused had become successful in rebutting presumption that cheque was drawn for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 1998 (HC)

Binod Sarawgi Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court : Patna

..... petitioner prayed for quashing' the entire criminal prosecution including the order on november 4, 1992, taking cognizance of the offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881, and under section 420 of the indian penal code in complaint case no. 654 of 1992.2. the facts of the case, in ..... the jurisdiction of the bhagalpur court. according to learned counsel, the cause of action as contemplated under section 142 of the negotiable instruments act, hereinafter referred to as 'the act' arises at the place where the cheque was issued or at the place where the cheque was delivered to pay or even ..... it would be useful to look into the relevant provisions of the said act. chapter xvii consisting of sections 138 to 142 was introduced by section 4 of the banking, public financial institutions and negotiable instruments laws (amendment) act, 1988. by virtue of this amendment, dishonour of cheques for insufficiency of ..... no offence. the next question arises as to which court shall have jurisdiction over the matter initiated under the aforesaid provisions of the said act. normally, the jurisdiction lies either in the place where the maker executed pronote or the place where they reside, but in a case ..... court within whose jurisdiction any of the above-mentioned places falls has, therefore, got jurisdiction to try the offence under section 138 of the act.'10. in the facts and circumstances of the case and the law discussed hereinabove, i am of the opinion that the court below has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2009 (HC)

Amit Raj Son of Ram Jeevan Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and Sushil Kum ...

Court : Patna

..... sub divisional judicial magistrate, patna, whereby he has taken cognizance for offences punishable under sections 420 and 406 i.p.c. as also section 138 of the negotiable instruments act (hereinafter referred to as 'the n.i. act').2. the prosecution case is based on the complaint petition filed by one sushil kumar, the complainant, impleaded herein as o.p. no. 2 for and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 05 1955 (HC)

Bombay Mercantile Bank Ltd. Vs. Oriol Industries Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1956Bom57; (1955)57BOMLR1039; [1955]25CompCas479(Bom); ILR1955Bom1072

..... . the learned judge below considered this decision of the house of lords, but he took the view that this decision was given under the common law and not under the negotiable instruments act which had not been enacted in england in 1875 when this decision was given. with very great respect to the learned judge, in the passage which we have quoted from ..... the company with regard to this sum of rs. 20,000.5. turning to the law on the subject, as we are dealing with a negotiable instrument we must first turn to the negotiable instruments act, and section 26 of the act provides :'every person capable of contracting, according to the law to which he is subject, may bind himself and be bound by the making ..... paragraph of section 26 should not be construed so as to extend the authority of a company to make negotiable instruments. but the law regarding the power of a company to make negotiable instruments is to be found in the companies act itself and not in the negotiable instruments act. therefore section 26 really throws no light on what the powers of a company are or what limitations ..... although, as we pointed out, the same principle is enunciated in section 27 of the negotiable instruments act, section 89 of the companies act emphasises that principle and makes it clear that a company will not be bound in its corporate capacity in respect of a negotiable instrument unless that negotiable instrument on the face of it and according to its tenor makes it clear that it is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 1952 (HC)

Tarachand Kevalram Vs. Sikri Brothers

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1953Bom290; (1953)55BOMLR231; ILR1953Bom717

..... 24-2-1949, and on that complaint hariram was convicted. (2) now, the question that arises is, what are the rights of the plaintiff under section 20, negotiable instruments act? that section deals with inchoate stamped instruments, and the scheme of that section is that when a person signs and delivers to another person an inchoate document which is properly stamped in accordance with ..... chagla, c.j. (1) a very interesting question under the negotiable instruments act arises in this appeal, and the facts giving rise to this appeal may be shortly stated. one harirarn, who is a finance broker approached the plaintiff on 4-2-1949, ..... was never at any stage a negotiation or transfer in his favour of a negotiable instrument which would entitle him to consider himself ..... to imply and contemplate that there must be a negotiation or a transfer to the holder in due course by someone who had the authority to transfer or negotiate the negotiable instrument. the transfer and the negotiation must be of a negotiable instrument, not the transfer of an inchoate document which is not a negotiable instrument at all under the act. therefore, as far as the plaintiff is concerned, there .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 21 1967 (HC)

Kadorilal and anr. Vs. Sukhlal Sajan Singh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1968MP4

..... and which is attested by a witness, must necessarily be held to be a bond. it is urged that though under section 13(1) read with explanation i of the negotiable instruments act a promissory note which is not, on the face of it, payable to order but which does not contain the words prohibiting transfer or indicating an intention that provision cannot ..... they fall within the exceptions pointed out by their lordshins. 9. in this connection, note may also bs taken of illustrations (a) and (b) under section 4 of the negotiable instruments act. those illustrations read thus: '(a) i promise to pay b or order rs. 500. (b) i acknowledge myself to be indebted to b in rs. 1,000 to be paid ..... to a particular person it will be deemed to be payable to order and will be negotiable instrument under th' negotiable instruments act unless expressly or by implication its transfer is prohibited. therefore, looking to the definition of the promissory note in the stamp act as well as in the negotiable instruments act it seems that a promissory note should, in its popular sense as understood by men of ..... provisions contained in section 2(22) (definition of promissory note) of the stamp art their lordships referred to the provisions contained in section 13 of the negotiable instruments act together with the explanation contained thereon. the instrument with which they were required to deal was one which had been executed on 1st of april 1917 (i.e. before the amendment of section 13 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 1965 (HC)

Jagjivandas Bhikhabhai Vs. Gumanbhai Narattamdas

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1967Guj1; (1965)GLR778

..... of the definition of 'promissory note' given in section 2(22) of the indian stamp act defines a promissory note by reference to its definition in the negotiable instruments act, 1881, we must go to the negotiable instruments act, 1881, to see how it is defined in that act. section 4 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881, defines a 'promissory note' in the following terms:'(4). a 'promissory note' is an ..... the correct law and must be overruled.(5) we have already set out the definition of promissory note contained in s. 4 of the negotiable instrument act, 1881. all that this definition requires is that there must be an instrument in writing which contains as unconditional undertaking, signed by the maker to pay a certain sum of money only to or to the order ..... instrument in writing (not being a bank note or a currency note) containing an unconditional undertaking, signed ..... the division bench of the bombay high court therefore held that khata was not a promissory note within the meaning of s. 4 of the negotiable instruments act. 1881. in the present case, however we find that the position is different. it is no doubt true that in the body of the khata the name of the payee .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1958 (HC)

Heerachand Vs. Jeevraj and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1959Raj1

..... dealing with that aspect of the matter, the following observation was made at page 160 :'under the circumstances, we cannot strictly apply the technical provisions of section 118 of the negotiable instruments act in the appellants' favour.'10. it is said that these observations, particularly the use of the word 'technical' in this sentence shows that the provisions of section 118 of ..... conscience or as being rules as are being observed generally in practice among the merchants in this country.it was also observed that the stringent or technical provisions of the negotiable instruments act with respect to presentment or notice of dishonour cannot be called into operation in determining the liability in the ease of 'hundis' which came to be executed in a ..... placed the burden on them. it was in these circumstances that the bench made the following observation :'we cannot strictly apply the technical provisions of section 118 of the negotiable instruments act in the appellant's favour. it is settled law that when the execution of a document is admitted by the executant thereof, the burden of proving want of consideration ..... ordinary documents. such a course would, to my mind, be an unwarranted infliction upon traders in this part of rajasthan in relation to hundis executed before 1949, when the negotiable instruments act was first brought into force in the former jodhpur state. besides the adoption of this view would be clearly ruinous to the interests of trade and traders and would throw .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2012 (HC)

Mr.M.Palanichamy. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Chennai

..... before adverting to the facts of this case, this court deems it fit to have a cursory look at some of the relevant provisions of the negotiable instruments act and the code.section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881 138. dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account. where any cheque drawn by a person on an account ..... cause of action need not confine to a particular transaction where an offence is alleged to have been committed. in cases filed under s. 138 of the negotiable instruments act, series of acts will result at different places. as already discussed (supra). giving the cheque by the accused to the complainant and presenting the same for collection by the ..... not been dishonoured due to the insufficiency of funds. the petitioner therein further contended that none of the ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act occurred within the legal jurisdiction of the learned xviii metropolitan magistrate court at saidapet. on the above pleadings and submissions, this court held that, "15. ........for ..... his choice. according to the learned counsel, an agreement entered into between the parties confer jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction for preferring a complaint under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881, depends upon various factors such as, location of both the companies with their registered offices or branches, the conditions in the invoice, conferring jurisdiction on any .....

Tag this Judgment!


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