Suo-Moto Case No. 01/2010 (In Re: Sugar ... vs 2.2.1 National Federation Of ... on 30 November, 2011
21. It is also pertinent to note that the argument of the Ld. Counsel for the
accused that section 9 NI Act should be read with section 15/16 NI Act can-
not be accepted as in the aforementioned case of 'Bank on India', Hon'ble
High Court at Delhi had further held that " With due respect to Punjab &
Haryana High Court, I consider that the view of Punjab &; Haryana High
Court was not correct. Punjab & Haryana High Court had read Section 9 of
the Negotiable Instrument Act along with Section 15 and 16 thereof. Section
9 of N.I. Act is an independent provision under Negotiable Instrument Act
and it cannot be confused with the provision regarding endorsee or endorse-
ment. 'Holder in due course' has to be considered independent to the en-
dorsee or endorsement and where a cheque is issued by a Director to dis-
charge the debt of the company payable towards the bank, I consider that the
bank is 'holder in due course', even if there is no endorsement made on the
CC No.10600/2016 State Bank of India Vs. Asha Rani Jindal pg. no. 13/25
Digitally signed
by RISHABH
RISHABH TANWAR
Date:
TANWAR 2025.02.28
15:29:50
+0530
cheque, because, the moment amount of the cheque had gone to the account
of the company, it was to go the bank towards the loan taken by the com-
pany." (Emphasis is of the undersigned).