Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.49 seconds)
Documents citing United Credit Ltd. vs Agro Sales India And Ors. on 3 April, 2000

A.Krishna Reddy vs P.V.R.S.Mani Kumar on 9 March, 2010

22. From the above decisions, it is clear that the decision of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 2000 SC 828 = 2000 (2) SCC 380 (Suman Sethi Vs. Ajay K.Churiwal), was relied upon by the Supreme Court in both the later judgments reported in 2001 AIR SCW 2352(2) = 2001 (10) SCC 763 (United Credit Ltd., Calcutta Vs. Agro Sales India and others) and also in 2003 (4) CTC 252 = 2003 (8) SCC 300 (K.R.Indira Vs. Dr.G.Adinarayana).
Madras High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 4 - R Mala - Full Document

Cnr. Dlct020131162016 M/S Hr ... vs M/S Vikas Vidyutikaran & Anr. Page 1 Of 24 on 28 May, 2022

12.27. At the stage of final arguments, the learned counsel for the Accused has also argued that the legal demand notice has made a demand of interest in addition to the cheque amount and the same is not in compliance with s.138 of the NI Act. The said objection is without merit considering that the said situation has already been examined in United Credit Vs. Agro Sales India 14, wherein a legal demand notice claiming the cheque amount as well as the interest and costs has been upheld as valid.
Delhi District Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Topline Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs State & Anr. on 20 June, 2011

"In the notice in question the "said amount", i.e. the cheque amount has been clearly stated. Respondent No. 1 had claimed in addition to the cheque amount, incidental charges and notice charge. These two amounts are severable. In the notice it was clearly stated that failure to comply with the demand necessary legal steps will be taken up. If respondent no. 1 had paid the cheque amount he would have been absolved from the criminal liability under section 138. Regarding other claims, a civil suit would be necessary." United Credit Ltd. Calcutta v. Agro Sales India & Ors. IV (2000) CCR 50 (SC), the Supreme Court again considered a notice of demand in which not only the amount covered by the cheque but also some other amount towards interest and cost was demanded by the complainant.
Delhi High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 2 - A Bharihoke - Full Document
1