citedby: 1323789

Aneeta Hada vs M/S Godfather Travels & Tours Pvt.Ltd on 8 May, 2008

22. Appellant's reliance on the last case in Girish Saxena v. Praveen Kumar Jain & Ors. [(2007) 2 JCC (NI) 220] is also unnecessary since in that case the accused was not a signatory to the cheque. The decision in that case would not be applicable to the present case.

Supreme Court of India Cites 60 - Cited by 699 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Uday Pratap Singh vs The State Trading Corporation Of India ... on 20 January, 2014

25. Similarly, Girish Saxena (Supra) was a case where cheque was issued by the drawer in the capacity of sole proprietor of a firm that later converted itself into the partnership firm and the case was quashed against the summoning of the other partners of the firm.

Delhi District Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Cr No. 35/14. Sanjeev Aggarwal vs . J & K Bank Ltd. on 16 December, 2014

11. Girish Saxena Vs. Praveen Kumar & Others, 141 (2007) DLT 8.

Delhi District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Cr No. 39/14. Manmohan Garg vs . J & K Bank Ltd. on 16 December, 2014

11. Girish Saxena Vs. Praveen Kumar & Others, 141 (2007) DLT 8.

Delhi District Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Preeti Gupta vs Sh. Chirag Garg on 25 February, 2012

7. Counsel for revisionist further relied on a case Girish Saxena v. Praveen Kumar Jain and Ors., 2007(2) ALD (Cri) 7, III (2007) BC363 wherein Delhi High Court quashed the proceedings against the appellant/revisionist on the ground that petitioner/revisionist was neither the drawer of the cheque nor it was alleged that he was partner or proprietor of firm when cheque got dishonoured or he was C.R. No.130/11 Preeti Gupta v. Chirag Garg Page 3 of 9 the person responsible for non payment of cheque amount.

Delhi District Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Preeti Gupta vs Sh. Chirag Garg on 25 February, 2012

7. Counsel for revisionist further relied on a case Girish Saxena v. Praveen Kumar Jain and Ors., 2007(2) ALD (Cri) 7, III (2007) BC363 wherein Delhi High Court quashed the proceedings against the appellant/revisionist on the ground that petitioner/revisionist was neither the drawer of the cheque nor it was alleged that he was partner or proprietor of firm when cheque got dishonoured or he was the person responsible for non payment of cheque C.R. No.128/11 Preeti Gupta v. Chirag Garg Page 3 of 9 amount.

Delhi District Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sandeep Khanna vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 6 January, 2022

c) Girish Saxena Vs Praveen Kumar Ors, 141 (2007) DLT 8,

Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Preeti Gupta vs Sh. Chirag Garg on 25 February, 2012

7. Counsel for revisionist further relied on a case Girish Saxena v. Praveen Kumar Jain and Ors., 2007(2) ALD (Cri) 7, III (2007) BC363 wherein Delhi High Court quashed the proceedings against the appellant/revisionist on the ground that petitioner/revisionist was neither the drawer of the cheque nor it was alleged that he was partner or proprietor of firm when cheque got dishonoured or he was C.R. No.129/11 Preeti Gupta v. Chirag Garg Page 3 of 9 the person responsible for non payment of cheque amount.

Delhi District Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results