Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.23 seconds)Section 142 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 141 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Suman Sethi vs Ajay K, Churiwal on 2 February, 2000
In Suman Sethi (Supra), the Supreme Court has held the the
notice of demand has to be of the amount of the cheque. If in addition
to the amount of the cheque, further demand in form of interest or
costs is made, it would depend on the language of the notice whether
it is bad in law. Where an omnibus demand is made without
specifying what was due under the dishonoured cheque, the notice
would fail to meet the legal requirement. The Supreme Court has held
as under:-
M/S. Rahul Builders vs M/S. Arihant Fertilizers & Chemical & ... on 2 November, 2007
14. The above view was reiterated by the Supreme Court in Rahul
Builders (Supra), stating as under:-
M/S Alliance Infrastructure Project ... vs Vinay Mittal on 18 January, 2010
15. Reference in this regard is also placed on the judgement of this
Court in M/s Alliance Infrastructure Project Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v.
Vinay Mittal, 2010 SCC OnLine Del 182, wherein it was held as
under:-
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Dashrathbhai Trikambhai Patel vs Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel on 11 October, 2022
16. In view of the Proviso (b) to Section 138 of the NI Act,
therefore, the cause of action for filing of the complaint would inter-
alia accrue to the complainant only where the complainant makes a
demand for the payment of the "said amount of money" by giving a
notice in writing to the drawer of the cheque within 30 days of the
receipt of the information by the complainant from the bank regarding
the return of the cheque as unpaid. The Supreme Court has clarified
that „the said amount‟ mentioned in Proviso (b) to Section 138 of the
NI Act is the cheque amount. It has further been clarified that if no
such demand is made, the notice would fall short of the legal
requirement. It has further been clarified that if any additional claims
are also made in the notice, unless they are severable in nature, the
cause of action for filing of the complaint shall fail. Reference in this
regard may also be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in
Dashrathbhai Trikambhai Patel v. Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel &
Anr., (2023) 1 SCC 578, as well.