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

S.MURALIDHAR
HDFC Bank – Appellant
Versus
Vardhman Precision Profiles & Tubes – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Harsh Sinha and Ms. Swati Goswami, Advocates.

ORDER

S. Muralidhar, J.—Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application is disposed of.

3. The Petitioner, HDFC Bank Limited, seeks by way of the present transfer petition, a direction that one of its cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘NI Act’) i.e CC No. 2583 of 2014 titled HDFC Bank Limited v. Vardhman Precision Profiles & Tubes Pvt. Ltd., should continue to be tried in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (‘MM’), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi.

4. The provocation for this petition is an order passed by the learned MM, Dwarka Courts on 29th August 2014, which reads as under:

“29.08.2014

Present: Sh. Sachin Katyal, Ld. Counsel for the Complainant.

Matter is listed for appearance of the accused.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has given following observations for ascertaining the territorial jurisdiction in offence under Section 138 N.I. Act in case titled as ‘Dashrath Rupsing Rathod v. State of Maharashtra & Anr [Criminal Appeal No. 2287 of 2009, decided on 1st August 2014 (Three Judge Bench)]:-

“Accordingly a reading of Section 138 NI Act in conjunction with Section 177, CrPC leaves no manner of doubt that the return of the che














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