that the cheque has
been returned not due to insufficiency of funds in the account, but on account of
the cheque being invalid ... hinges upon the validity of the cheque, which cheque, according to
the learned senior counsel is an invalid cheque and does not fall within
during the period of validity of six months but only after the cheque period has become expired. This relevant point deserves consideration for solving ... other words, when the date is changed, that too in an invalid cheque after the expiry of the period of validity, it is certainly material
writings on the cheque as well as in the signature and therefore, the cheque is invalid by relying upon the judgment reported ... consideration under the cheque. Therefore, mere issuance of cheque by the respondent will not lead to the presumption that the cheque was issued towards legally
which STR 916 of 1997 was compromised, the cheque was dated 3.9.1998. On 8.10.1998 when the cheque was presented to the Bank for collection ... which the cheque was sent for collection, it is an invalid cheque since Six months have already elapsed.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant
Legality – Accused seeking to send cheque to hand writing expert to
compare signature with other writings found in cheque and to find
out whether same ... Filling up of by any person
other than drawer does not invalidate cheque- Subsequent filling
up of unfilled signed cheques not an alteration.
Para
different ink, it
cannot be held, in law that the cheque is invalid or an inchoate instrument.
35. As rightly contended by the learned counsel ... amount and other particulars.
This in itself would not invalidate the cheque. The
onus would still be on the accused to prove that the
cheque
cheque may have been filled in by any person other
than the drawer, if the cheque is duly signed by the
drawer. If the cheque ... Filling up of by any person other than
drawer does not invalidate cheque Subsequent
filling up of unfilled signed cheques not an
alteration.
Para
complaint. Further, the trial Court coming to a conclusion that the
cheque had been issued in the year 2001, which was presented ... said amount on 12.08.2001, was presented three years
thereafter. Hence, invalid cheque was presented beyond its
limitation period. This finding of the lower Court
that 'joint sign required' and hence, it is an invalid cheque
in the eyes of law. So, Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments ... mere
fact that the dishonoured cheque was issued from the same account
by the drawer of such a cheque. The analogy of Section
lakhs as on
20.12.2017. Thereby, the defendant issued a post-dated Cheque dated
20.01.2018 for Rs.15 lakhs drawn on ICICI Bank in favour ... cheque for collection and the
date of three months’ limitation was lapsed on 20.04.2018. The defendant,
only to make the cheque invalid, agreed
