Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.24 seconds)
M/S Vintage Credit & Leasing Pvt. Ltd vs . Jaya Pardeep on 18 May, 2023 cites

Dashrathbhai Trikambhai Patel vs Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel on 11 October, 2022

37. Therefore, as per report of the dispatcher , it was served upon New Delhi GPO. Another contention raised by the complainant that the amount of loan was disbursed in the account of PK Pardeep and the cheque amount was disbursed in his account. Apart from this, installments were also paid by P.K. Pradeep, principle borrower who had also issued several cheques in favour of the complainant as security cheque. As per averment made in the preceeding para , it revealed that out of Rs.5 lac, Rs. 4,26,275/- was credited in the account of Mr. P.K Pardeep and same had to be payable in 24 months. Part payment has been paid as EMIs of Rs. 29,125/- each therefore outstanding amount of Rs.5,55,655/-. Four EMI also paid I.e total Rs. 1,45,500/- and balance is Rs.4,05155/-. The cheque amount is of Rs. 4,92,000/- which is much higher from the actual outstanding amount. To this effect, the accused has relied on judgment M/S Alliance Infrastructure project Pvt. Ltd. & Anr Vs. Vinay Mittal 2010 (1) JCC (NI) 98 and judgment of CC NO. 25387/2018 M/S Vintage Credit &Leasing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jaya Pardeep 26/30 27 Dashrathbai Trikambhai Patel Vs. Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel & Anr. in Crl. Appeal 1497 ( 2022) Live Law ( SC) 830 wherein it was held that :
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 251 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document

M/S Alliance Infrastructure Project ... vs Vinay Mittal on 18 January, 2010

37. Therefore, as per report of the dispatcher , it was served upon New Delhi GPO. Another contention raised by the complainant that the amount of loan was disbursed in the account of PK Pardeep and the cheque amount was disbursed in his account. Apart from this, installments were also paid by P.K. Pradeep, principle borrower who had also issued several cheques in favour of the complainant as security cheque. As per averment made in the preceeding para , it revealed that out of Rs.5 lac, Rs. 4,26,275/- was credited in the account of Mr. P.K Pardeep and same had to be payable in 24 months. Part payment has been paid as EMIs of Rs. 29,125/- each therefore outstanding amount of Rs.5,55,655/-. Four EMI also paid I.e total Rs. 1,45,500/- and balance is Rs.4,05155/-. The cheque amount is of Rs. 4,92,000/- which is much higher from the actual outstanding amount. To this effect, the accused has relied on judgment M/S Alliance Infrastructure project Pvt. Ltd. & Anr Vs. Vinay Mittal 2010 (1) JCC (NI) 98 and judgment of CC NO. 25387/2018 M/S Vintage Credit &Leasing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jaya Pardeep 26/30 27 Dashrathbai Trikambhai Patel Vs. Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel & Anr. in Crl. Appeal 1497 ( 2022) Live Law ( SC) 830 wherein it was held that :
Delhi High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 315 - V K Jain - Full Document
1   2 Next