Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 26 (1.63 seconds)Section 19 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 139 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Kakubhai & Co. vs Nathmal Kisanlal on 2 March, 1979
34. The counsel for the complainant has relied upon the
following rulings reported in; (1) Cr.A.No:123/2021 in the case of
"M/s. Kalamani Tex & Anr. Vs. P.Balasumbramanian", (2010) 11
S.C.C. 441 Rangappa Vs. Sri.Mohan, (3) AIR 2020 S.C. 945 APS
Forex Services Pvt. Ltd. V. Shakti International Fashion Linkers and
Ors." (4) 2020(2) AKR 424 Saptagiri Traders, Bangalore V.
32 CC No.21502/2013
SCC.H-25
D.Venkatesh, (5) 2020(1) KCCR 606 Revanappa Vs. Narasingha Naik,
(6) AIR 1986 S.C. 1194 in the case of Nanakram V. Kundalrai, M/s.
Kakubhai and Co V. Nathmal. The aforesaid five decisions relied
upon for drawing presumption in favour of complainant and
presumption in favour of complainant that there exist legally
enforceable debt or liability. These decisions are applicable in favour
of the complainant if the accused did not lead any evidence of
rebuttal or failed to rebut the presumption. With due respect to the
said decisions the facts and circumstances are different in the
present case. The present case is based on agreements entered
contrary to Sec.19 of KMMCR rules, as discussed above the
agreements are unenforceable and void and hence there is no legally
recoverable debt or liability. With due respect to the ruling relied
upon at serial number 6, I am of the view that the facts and
circumstances of the said case and present case are different and
hence it is also not helpful to the case of the complainant.
R. Parimala Bai vs Bhaskar Narasimhaiah on 6 July, 2018
35. The counsel for the accused relied upon the following
rulings in support of his arguments, they are; (1) Crl.P.No:1387/2011
in the case of "R.Parimala Bai Vs. Bhaskar Narasimhaiah", which is
aptly applicable to the present case as the agreements based on
33 CC No.21502/2013
SCC.H-25
which cheques alleged to have been issued are not comes within the
purview of legally recoverable debt or liability as they are hit by
SEction 23 of Contract Act.
M.S. Narayana Menon @ Mani vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 4 July, 2006
(4) (2006) 5 SCC 39 M.S.Narayana Menon @ Mani Vs. State of Kerala
and Another, (5) AIR 2018 S.C. 536`1 Reena Hazarika Vs. State of
Assam", (6) (2002) 2 SCC 642 A.V. Murthy Vs. B.S.Nagabasavanna,
(7) AIR 1974 SC 1892 Kuju Collieries Ltd Vs. Jharkhand Mines Ltd.
And Others", (8) (1999) 3 SCC 35 Bharat Barrel & Drum
Manufacturing Company Vs. Amin Chand Payrelal", (9) AIR 1971
S.C. 1865 Sait Tarajee Khimchand and Others V. Yelamarti Satyam
and Others.". These citations are applicable to the present case on
34 CC No.21502/2013
SCC.H-25
hand. The counsel for the accused has also relied upon the other
decisions; (10) AIR 1986 S.C. 1099 M/s. Sodhi Transport Co. And
another, etc. Vs. State of U.P. and another etc.
Reena Hazarika vs The State Of Assam on 31 October, 2018
(4) (2006) 5 SCC 39 M.S.Narayana Menon @ Mani Vs. State of Kerala
and Another, (5) AIR 2018 S.C. 536`1 Reena Hazarika Vs. State of
Assam", (6) (2002) 2 SCC 642 A.V. Murthy Vs. B.S.Nagabasavanna,
(7) AIR 1974 SC 1892 Kuju Collieries Ltd Vs. Jharkhand Mines Ltd.
And Others", (8) (1999) 3 SCC 35 Bharat Barrel & Drum
Manufacturing Company Vs. Amin Chand Payrelal", (9) AIR 1971
S.C. 1865 Sait Tarajee Khimchand and Others V. Yelamarti Satyam
and Others.". These citations are applicable to the present case on
34 CC No.21502/2013
SCC.H-25
hand. The counsel for the accused has also relied upon the other
decisions; (10) AIR 1986 S.C. 1099 M/s. Sodhi Transport Co. And
another, etc. Vs. State of U.P. and another etc.
A.V. Murthy vs B.S. Nagabasavanna on 8 February, 2002
(4) (2006) 5 SCC 39 M.S.Narayana Menon @ Mani Vs. State of Kerala
and Another, (5) AIR 2018 S.C. 536`1 Reena Hazarika Vs. State of
Assam", (6) (2002) 2 SCC 642 A.V. Murthy Vs. B.S.Nagabasavanna,
(7) AIR 1974 SC 1892 Kuju Collieries Ltd Vs. Jharkhand Mines Ltd.
And Others", (8) (1999) 3 SCC 35 Bharat Barrel & Drum
Manufacturing Company Vs. Amin Chand Payrelal", (9) AIR 1971
S.C. 1865 Sait Tarajee Khimchand and Others V. Yelamarti Satyam
and Others.". These citations are applicable to the present case on
34 CC No.21502/2013
SCC.H-25
hand. The counsel for the accused has also relied upon the other
decisions; (10) AIR 1986 S.C. 1099 M/s. Sodhi Transport Co. And
another, etc. Vs. State of U.P. and another etc.