SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Kar) 52

ASHOK G.NIJAGANNAVAR
M. Nagappa S/o Karibasappa – Appellant
Versus
Mohamad Aslam Savanur S/o Abdul Rehaman – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sri. Gururaj Joshi.
For the Respondents: Sri. Ramakrishna, Sri. M.R. Hiremathad.

Judgement Key Points

What is the proper mode of service and presumption of service of legal notice under NI Act Section 138 when sent by registered post to the correct address? What is the role of General Clauses Act Section 17 and Section 27 in establishing service of notice in NI Act cases? What are the appellate conclusions regarding acquittal and conviction in NI Act cases where service of notice is challenged?

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!)

What is the proper mode of service and presumption of service of legal notice under NI Act Section 138 when sent by registered post to the correct address?

What is the role of General Clauses Act Section 17 and Section 27 in establishing service of notice in NI Act cases?

What are the appellate conclusions regarding acquittal and conviction in NI Act cases where service of notice is challenged?


JUDGMENT :

ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 05.07.2011 passed in C.C. No. 1575/2009, whereby the respondent-accused is acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, (hereinafter referred to as N.I. Act) and also praying to pass an order to convict the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant-complainant and the respondent-accused were known to each other. The appellant-complainant had given a loan of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the respondent-accused for his family necessities through a cheque bearing No. 146341 for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- drawn on Canara Bank, P.J. Extension, Davanagere and also paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in cash. The respondent-accused, having failed to pay the amount within a reasonable time, had issued three cheques bearing Nos. 981735, 981736 and 981737 dated 01.03.2006, 01.04.2006 and 01.05.2006 respectively, for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- each, drawn on Laxmi Villas Bank, Davanagere Branch. The said cheques were presented to bank for encashment but they were dishonoured and returned with an

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            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

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
            whatsapp-icon Back to top