Back
K. SREEDHAR RAO, J.
KEYGIEN GLOBAL LIMITED, BANGALORE Appellant
versus
MADRA V IMPEX, BANGALORE AND ANOTHER Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1466 of 2001.
Decided on 26th June, 2006
Negotiable Instruments Act- Section 138- Liability of accused- Cheque issued in respect of supply of goods- On delivery goods found defective -Accused returned the goods- Held, there is no legal obligation on the part of the accused to see that the cheque is honoured. [K. Sreedhar Rao, J.] - It is admitted that accused has not appropriated the goods supplied by the complainant. If the rejection of the goods by the accused is illegal, the complainant has remedy to sue for damages but, has no right to seek value of the rejected and returned goods. The cheque is obviously issued in respect of rejected and returned goods. Hence, the accused would be under no legal obligation to see that the cheque issued is cleared since the liability is in serious dispute. The complainant is not entitled to make use of the cheque to recover the amounts under the pretext of seeking damages obviously when the cheque is not issued towards the payment of damages. In that view, the order of acquittal recorded is sound and proper. Appeal dismissed.
Dishonour of Cheque-Liability of accused- Cheque issued in respect of supply of goods- On delivery goods found defective -Accused returned the goods- Held, there is no legal obligation on the part of the accused to see that the cheque is honoured [K. Sreedhar Rao, J.] - It is admitted that accused has not appropriated the goods supplied by the complainant. If the rejection of the goods by the accused is illegal, the complainant has remedy to sue for damages but, has no right to seek value of the rejected and returned goods. The cheque is obviously issued in respect of rejected and returned goods. Hence, the accused would be under no legal obligation to see that the cheque issued is cleared since the liability is in serious dispute. The complainant is not entitled to make use of the cheque to recover the amounts under the pretext of seeking damages obviously when the cheque is not issued towards the payment of damages. In that view, the order of acquittal recorded is sound and proper. Appeal dismissed
The complainant supplied certain quantity of readymade garments to the respondent-accused. The accused towards the value of the garments supplied, issued cheque-Ex. P. 3. The cheque on presentation is dishonoured. Statutory notice is issued and private complaint is filed. Per contra, the accused submits that the goods delivered were defective and not upto the standards agreed. Therefore, the entire bulk has been rejected and returned to the complainant. The accused states that in view of the rejection of the bulk, the accused does not incur any liability to honour the cheque. The Trial Court upheld the defence contention and acquitted the accused.
2. It is admitted that cheque was issued in respect of supply of readymade garments. On delivery, it is found that goods were defective and not according to specifications. Hence, the accused rejected and returned the goods. It is admitted that accused has not appropriated the goods supplied by the complainant. If the rejection of the goods by the accused is illegal, the complainant has remedy to sue for damages but, has no right to seek value of the rejected and returned goods. The cheque is obviously issued in respect of rejected and returned goods. Hence, the accused would be under no legal obligation to see that the cheque issued is cleared since the liability is in serious dispute. The complainant is not entitled to make use of the cheque to recover the amounts under the pretext of seeking damages obviously when the cheque is not issued towards the payment of damages. In that view, the order of acquittal recorded is sound and proper. Appeal dismissed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
