T.S.THAKUR, C.NAGAPPAN
Mahesh Stationaries – Appellant
Versus
Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
T.S. THAKUR, J.
1. In this petition under Section 406 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioners seek transfer of Criminal Complaint No.14089 of 2009 from the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gurgaon, Haryana to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Bangalore.
2. The petitioner appears to have borrowed a loan of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakh) for business purposes from the respondent-company. A cheque allegedly issued in partial repayment of the loan amount and drawn on the Syndicate Bank, City Market Branch, Bangalore, when presented for encashment to ING Vysya Bank, Gurgaon appears to have been dishonoured resulting in the issue of statutory notices to the petitioners and eventual filing of a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Gurgaon under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Magistrate has taken cognizance and summoned the petitioners for appearance to face the trial. Petitioners have, in that backdrop, filed the present transfer petition seeking transfer of the complaint afore-mentioned from Gurgaon to the competent Court at Bangalore.
3. Petitioners' case, as is evident from the averments made in the transfer petition, is
Harman Electronics (P) Ltd. v. National Panasonic India (P) Ltd.
None of the cases listed explicitly indicate that they have been overruled, reversed, or treated as bad law. There are no keywords such as "overruled," "reversed," "criticized," or "overturned" in the provided summaries. Therefore, based on the available information, no case law is identified as bad law.
Followed/Established Law:
Ishar Alloy Steels Ltd. VS Jayaswants Neco Ltd. - 2001 0 Supreme(Ker) 101: The case establishes a legal point regarding the presentation of cheques under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The language "The main legal point established in the judgment is that..." suggests this case is setting a precedent or clarifying the law, and there is no indication it has been overruled or criticized.
Harman Electronics (P) Ltd. VS National Panasonic India Ltd. - Dishonour Of Cheque (2008): Similarly, this case clarifies the jurisdiction of courts under the Criminal Procedure Code. The phrase "The main legal point established in the judgment is..." indicates it is an authoritative statement of law, with no signs of subsequent negative treatment.
Mixed or Unclear Treatment:
Archibald Quadros VS Laxman Shetty, M. D. S - 2014 0 Supreme(Kar) 657: The case references multiple entities and includes a fragment of a procedural context. There is no explicit language indicating whether this case has been followed, distinguished, or criticized in subsequent decisions. Without additional context, its treatment remains uncertain.
Archibald Quadros VS Laxman Shetty, M. D. S - 2014 0 Supreme(Kar) 657: Due to the fragmented nature of the description and lack of treatment indicators, the judicial treatment of this case cannot be conclusively determined from the provided excerpt.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.