Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.56 seconds)
Hartaj Singh vs Codrej Agrovet Ltd & Another on 31 May, 2010 cites

K. Bhaskaran vs Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan And Anr on 29 September, 1999

8. It is clear from the stand taken and the averments made in the reply filed by the respondent No.1, that there is a factual dispute as to whether the negotiations and meetings were held in Delhi before the supplies were made. There is a dispute about the place or location where the debt or liability had accrued and were/are payable. There is a dispute about the place where the dishonoured cheque was delivered to the complainant. Reply of the petitioner dated 12th January, 2009 has been quoted above. These disputes cannot be decided without parties leading oral evidence and cross- examination of witnesses. Section 178 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been referred to and examined in K.Bhaskaran (supra). Per- se and ex facie it cannot be said that the act of filing the criminal complaint in Delhi after presentation of the cheque by the respondent-complainant to their bankers in Delhi and its dishonour is ingenious, insidious, guileful or guided by the intention to harass and abuse the process of law. It will not be appropriate to exercise extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 at the initial stage itself and quash the summoning order.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 3240 - Full Document

Shri Ishar Alloy Steels Ltd vs Jayaswals Neco Limited on 22 February, 2001

1. The petitioner Col. Hartaj Singh submits that the criminal courts in Delhi do not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed by respondent No.1, Godrej Agrovet Ltd. for dishonour of cheque of Rs.15,48,639/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard has relied upon Shri Ishar Alloy Steels Ltd. Vs. Jayaswals Neko Ltd., (2001) 3 SCC 609, Harnam Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Panasonic India Ltd., (2009) 1 SCC 720 and a decision of this Court in Online IT Shoppe India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. State & Anr. Crl. M.C. No.2695/2009 and Crl. M.A. No.9081/2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is based in Ladakh and the bank from which the dishonoured cheque was issued is situated at Panchkula, Haryana.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 431 - Full Document
1   2 Next