Second Notice After Issuing Fresh Cheque Does Not Bar A Cheque Bounce/ Dishonour Complaint

Must Read

Calcutta High Court Rejects the Petition Challenging the Bid’s Rejection Filed on Seeking Condonation of Delay Due to Pandemic Interventions in Absence of Satisfactory...

Case: Shiba Prosad Banerjee vs The State of West Bengal and others The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya of Calcutta...

Calcutta High Court Reiterated the Scope of the Grounds for Exercising Its Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction.

Case: Shreya Beria vs Vedant Bhagat The Calcutta HC on 20th January 2021, dismissed the criminal revision filed by...

Gujarat High Court Allows a Family Suit to Be Transferred From Family Court, Surat to the Family Court, Bhavnagar

The Court directed that in light of the circumstances of the present case, the application of the applicant- wife...

Telangana HC Grants Two Days to Convey the Decision of Appropriate Notification and Counselling to the Higher Secondary Department

Excerpt In Telangana Republican Party Trp vs The State Of Telangana, on 18 January 2021, Telangana High Court directed the...

Telangana HC: Applications Have to Be Made Through Online Web Portal “Dharani” for Mutation of Names

Excerpt In P. Manohar Reddy vs The State Of Telangana And 3 Others, on 18 January 2021, Telangana High Court...

Follow us

Case Name: M/s Sicagen India Ltd. v. Mahindra Vadineni

Supreme Court of India ruled that a second notice under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 after new cheques are presented does not make the complaint un-maintainable.

Facts of the Case and Issue

Respondents in the present case wrote three cheques which were returned with the message “insufficient funds”. Appellant issued a notice to the respondent demanding the sum due. Respondent complying with the notice re-issued the cheques but they were also dis-honored, another notice was issued by the Appellant. On not receiving the payment Appellant filed a section 138 complaint in the District Court of Madras. Respondent filed a section 482 petition for quashing of a criminal complaint before the Madras High Court on the ground that the complaint was filed on the second notice and hence not maintainable. Madras High Court ruled in favor of Respondent saying that complaint filed on second notice and with the same cause of action is not maintainable and quashed the proceedings. Upset by this verdict, Appellant appealed in the Supreme Court of India.

The main Issue before the division bench of Supreme Court was whether the prosecution based upon second or successive dishonor of the cheque is permissible or not?

Judgment

Division Bench of Justice R. Bhanumati and Justice Indira Banerjee relying on Three-judge Bench decision of the Supreme Court of India in MSR Leathers v. S.Palaniappan and Another decided the case in favor of the Appellant. They cited the relevant part of the MSR Leathers judgment which said that :

“ there is nothing in the provision of section 138 of the Act that forbids the holder of the Cheque to make a second or successive presentation of the cheque and institute the criminal complaint based on the second or successive dishonor of the cheque on its presentation.”

Moreover, Judge also added that High Court’s verdict is liable to be set aside and resting on the reasoning in MSR Leathers it can be concluded without a doubt that complaint filed on the basis of second statutory notice is not barred.

Counsel for respondent raised various arguments such as i) the cheques were not issued ii) amount payable is not legally enforceable debt but the bench refused to entertain them, restored the complaint and sent the matter back to the District Court, saying parties are free to raise relevant contentions at the Trial before the District Court.

Learnings of the Case

From this case, we learn that a cheque bounce complaint based on second notice is valid only if the fresh cheques presented were also dis-honored.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Calcutta High Court Rejects the Petition Challenging the Bid’s Rejection Filed on Seeking Condonation of Delay Due to Pandemic Interventions in Absence of Satisfactory...

Case: Shiba Prosad Banerjee vs The State of West Bengal and others The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya of Calcutta High Court on 22nd January...

Calcutta High Court Reiterated the Scope of the Grounds for Exercising Its Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction.

Case: Shreya Beria vs Vedant Bhagat The Calcutta HC on 20th January 2021, dismissed the criminal revision filed by the Petitioners (wife) challenging the...

Calcutta High Court: Deceased’s Wife Has the Sole Right Over His Preserved Sperm; Father Doesn’t Have Any Fundamental Right Over Son’s Progeny Without the...

Case: Asok Kumar Chatterjee vs. The Union of India & Ors. The Calcutta High Court dismissed the petition by the Petitioner (father) on 19th...

Gujarat High Court Allows a Family Suit to Be Transferred From Family Court, Surat to the Family Court, Bhavnagar

The Court directed that in light of the circumstances of the present case, the application of the applicant- wife to transfer the case from...

Telangana HC Grants Two Days to Convey the Decision of Appropriate Notification and Counselling to the Higher Secondary Department

Excerpt In Telangana Republican Party Trp vs The State Of Telangana, on 18 January 2021, Telangana High Court directed the Higher Education Department for passing...

Telangana HC: Applications Have to Be Made Through Online Web Portal “Dharani” for Mutation of Names

Excerpt In P. Manohar Reddy vs The State Of Telangana And 3 Others, on 18 January 2021, Telangana High Court directed that one has to...

Indonesian Spa Therapist Approaches Supreme Court Regarding Illegal Detention Followed by Raid at the Spa

An Indonesian spa therapist has moved to Supreme Court, whilst challenging an HC order which provided relief to the police inspector who was involved in the illegal detention of the spa therapist in a woman’s home which was followed by a police raid at the spa.

Questions of Forgery, Tampering Not Capable of Summary Adjudication Under Article 226 in Delhi High Court’s Jee Marks Case

Questions of fraud, forgery, and tampering require elaborate evidence as per the ruling of the Delhi High Court making it incapable of summary adjudication...

Supreme Court: Urgent and Immediate Reforms Needed in the Legal Education Due To Mushrooming of Law Schools

The Supreme Court, on Saturday, said that there is an urgent need for reforming the legal education in the country as its quality is being affected due to the ‘mushrooming’ of Law Colleges.

Delhi High Court Ruled Disclosure of Interest in Information Sought Under Rti Act Necessary to Establish Bonafides of Applicant

The Delhi HC opined that disclosure of the interest of information is necessary for the information sought under the RTI Act for establishing bonafide...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -