LawforAll

▼
Sunday, January 16, 2022

Cheque issued as security is enforceable the cheque though issued as security at the point when the loan was advanced, it was issued as an assurance to repay the amount after the debt becomes due for repayment. The loan was in subsistence when the cheque was issued and had become repayable during June/July 2015 and the cheque issued towards repayment was agreed to be presented thereafter. If the amount was not paid in any other mode before June/July 2015, it was incumbent on the respondent No.2 to arrange sufficient balance in the account to honour the cheque which was to be presented subsequent to June/July 2015. These aspects would prima­facie indicate that there was a transaction between the parties towards which a legally recoverable debt was claimed by the appellant and the cheque issued by the respondent No.2 was presented. On such cheque being dishonoured, cause of action had arisen for issuing a notice and presenting the criminal complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act on the payment not being made

›
      Cheque issued as security is enforceable  the cheque though issued as security at the point when the loan was advanced, it was issued ...
Wednesday, December 15, 2021

quashing the Chargesheet Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 304-B of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the D.P. Act = It is the well-settled principle laid down in cases too numerous to mention, that if the FIR did not disclose the commission of an offence, the court would be justified in quashing the proceedings preventing the abuse of process of law. Simultaneously, the courts are expected to adopt a cautious approach in matters of quashing, especially in cases of matrimonial disputes whether the FIR in fact discloses commission of an offence by the relatives of the principal accused or the FIR prima facie discloses a case of overimplication by involving the entire family of the accused at the instance of the complainant, who is out to settle her scores arising out of the teething problem or skirmish of domestic bickering while settling down in her new matrimonial surrounding.”

›
  SLP(Crl.) No. 2786 of 2019  REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION  CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1628 OF 2021 (Ar...

“65. Levy of market fees:= We also endorse the view in the aforesaid judgments but in the case on hand respondent is a buyer as defined under sub-section (2) of Section 65 of the Act and we cannot ignore the second proviso 14 and Explanation to Section 65(2) of the Act. It is not a case where the respondent is denying sale of the imported agricultural produce within the market area of the appellant after processing. In that view of the matter it is not entitled for exemption from payment of market fees.

›
  REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION  CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7706 OF 2021 (Arising out of Special Leave Petitio...

whether the limitation period under Section 13(2)3 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 could not be extended beyond the statutorily prescribed period of forty-five days as held by New India 1 “NCDRC” 2 Assurance Company Limited v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited . = In the present case, before the decision of the Constitution Bench, the delay was condoned by the NCDRC by furnishing reasons for the exercise of such discretion. Having regard to the prospective effect of the judgment of the Constitution Bench in New India Assurance Company Limited (supra) and the orders of this Court in Reliance General Insurance Company Limited (supra) and Bhasin Infotech-2018 (supra), which had recognized an element of discretion pending the reference, we are of the considered view that no case for interference is made in the order of the NCDRC allowing the application for condonation of delay on merits.

›
 1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. 7546 of 2021 Diamond Exports & Anr. ....Appell...