Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.34 seconds)
Gautam Industrial Corporation Pvt Ltd ... vs State Of Gujarat & 6 on 18 February, 2016 cites

Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 1 August, 2014

15. We are in complete agreement with the contention advanced at the hands of the learned counsel for the appellant. We are satisfied, that Section 142(2)(a), amended through the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Second Ordinance, 2015, vests jurisdiction for initiating proceedings for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, inter alia in the territorial jurisdiction of the Court, where the cheque is delivered for collection (through an account of the branch of the bank where the payee or holder in due course maintains an account). We are also satisfied, based on Section 142A(1) to the effect, that the judgment rendered by this Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod's case,would not stand in the way of the appellant, insofar territorial jurisdiction for initiating proceedings emerging from the dishonor of the cheque in the present case arises.
Supreme Court of India Cites 66 - Cited by 805 - V Sen - Full Document

M/S Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. vs Inderpal Singh on 24 November, 2015

.8 Thus, the conjoint reading of the newly inserted provision of the N.I Act and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bridgestone India Private Page 8 of 9 HC-NIC Page 8 of 9 Created On Sun Feb 28 04:01:38 IST 2016 R/CR.RA/180/2015 JUDGMENT Limited (supra), it is vividly clear that the newly inserted provisions of the N.I Act are applicable with retrospective effect of 15.6.2015 and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod (supra), is statutorily superseded. I am, therefore, of the view that the impugned order of the learned trial Magistrate requires interference in this Revision Application.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 16 - Cited by 109 - J S Khehar - Full Document
1   2 Next