Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 25 (0.55 seconds)

Sangeeta Batra vs M/S Vnd Foods & Ors. on 1 July, 2015

v. Ram Kumar Gupta HUF that the purpose of the provision (Section 138 N.I. Act) would become otiose if the provision is interpreted to exclude cases where debt is incurred after the drawing of the cheque but before its encashment. Reference may also be made to the judgment titled as Sangeeta Batra vs M/S VND Foods, (2015) 3 DLT (Cri) 422 in this respect. The debt/ liability existed at time when the cheques were presented for encashment as the rent had fallen due in advance at the beginning of the calendar month for which the cheques had been issued. The said cheques were dishonoured on presentation and the appellants/ accused persons failed to make the payment of the amount due against the cheques despite service of the statutory legal notice. Accordingly, the ingredients of the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are made out and the appellant/ accused no. 1 company is clearly liable to be convicted and was rightly convicted for the said offence.
Delhi High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 17 - V Sanghi - Full Document
1   2 3 Next