..... Jealously Guarding Your Interest.....!


Home  |  Contact

Free Legal Advice
... If your are facing any legal problems you may seek our Free Legal Advice ...
Inviting Association
... Hi! If you are a Lawyer, Advocate, Attorney, You may Associate with us...

Cheque Dishonour, Check Dishonor, Cheque Bounce, Legal Notice, 138 N. I. Act Complaint, Money Recovery Suit, Order 37 CPC Case, Credit Card

Cheque Dishonour

Legal Notice for Cheque Dishonour, Check dishonor

138 N. I. Act Complaint and Money Recovery Suit

Credit Card

Cheque Dishonour Case Law

Important Case laws on Cheque Dishonour (Check Dishonor)

Suman Sethi, Appellant V. Ajay K. Churiwal And Another, Respondents. 2000-(087)-AIR -0828 –SC

Para No. 6. We have to ascertain the meaning of the words the "said amount of money" occurring in clauses (b) and (c) to the proviso to Section 138. Reading the section as a whole we have no hesitation to hold that the above expression refers to the words "payment of any amount of money" occurring in the main Section 138 i.e. the cheque amount. So in a notice, under clause (b) to the proviso, demand has to be made for the cheque amount….
     Para No. 8. It is a well-settled principle of law that the notice has to be read as a whole. In the notice, demand has to be made for the "said amount" i.e. the cheque amount. If no such demand is made the notice no doubt would fall short of its legal requirement. Where in addition to the "said amount" there is also a claim by way of interest, cost etc. whether the notice is bad would depend on the language of the notice. If in a notice while giving the break-up of the claim the cheque amount, interest, damages etc. are separately specified, other such claims for interest, cost etc. would be superfluous and these additional claims would be severable and will not invalidate the notice. If, however, in the notice an omnibus demand is made without specifying what was due under the dishonoured cheque, the notice might well fail to meet the legal requirement and may be regarded as bad.
     Para No. 9. This Court had occasion to deal with Section 138 of the Act in Central Bank of India v. Saxons Farms ((1999) 8 SCC 221 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 1411 : JT (1999) 8 SC 58) and held that the object of the notice is to give a chance to the drawer of the cheque to rectify his omission. Though in the notice demand for compensation, interest, cost etc. is also made the drawer will be absolved from his liability under Section 138 if he makes the payment of the amount covered by the cheque of which he was aware within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice or before the complaint is filed.
     Para No. 10. In Section 138 the legislature clearly stated that for the dishonoured cheque the drawer shall be liable for conviction if the demand is not met within 15 days of the receipt of notice but this is without prejudice to any other provision of the Act. If the cheque amount is paid within the above period or before the complaint is filed the legal liability under Section 138 will cease and for recovery of other demands as compensation, costs, interest etc., a civil proceeding will lie. Therefore, if in a notice any other sum is indicated in addition to the "said amount" the notice cannot be faulted, as stated above.

Read More ... Cheque Dishonour, Legal Notice for Cheque Dishonour, 138 N I Act Complaint and Money Recovery Suit
Credit Card, Cheque Dishonour Case Law
Home | Contact
Designed and Maintained by DELHIADVOCATE. © 1999 - 2010 DELHIADVOCATE
Last Updated: 18 July 2010