VINOD GOEL
BANSAL PLYWOOD – Appellant
Versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) – Respondent
VINOD GOEL, J.
1. Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to impugned judgment dated 28.10.2015 passed by the Trial Court whereby respondents 2 & 3 were acquitted for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short ‘NI Act’).
2. Brief facts leading to the present criminal appeal are that the appellant, a proprietary firm through sole proprietor Pawan Bansal is engaged in the business of supplying timber and plywood. The respondent no.3 is the proprietor of respondent no.2 firm M/s Bosecage. Respondent no.1 through its proprietor used to purchase timber and plywood from the appellant. On 18.12.2010 the respondent no.2 & 3 had purchased goods worth Rs.1,72,522/- from the appellant and a bill no.254 (tax invoice) was raised against this transaction. Respondent no.3 issued a cheque no.222181 dated 18.12.2010 drawn on State Bank of India, branch Kalkaji, New Delhi in favour of the appellant against the said Bill. The said cheque was dishonoured for the reason “Payment Stopped by Drawer” vide memo dated 21.12.2010. The appellant got issued a legal notice dated 31.12.2010 by Regd. AD & UPC dated 04.01.2011 to the respondent no.2 through its
Rangappa v. Sri Mohan (2010) 11 SCC 441
Laxmi Dyechem v. State of Gujarat
Bharat Barrel & Drum Mfg. Co. v. Amin Chand Payrelal
M.M.T.C. Ltd. v. Medchl Chemicals and Pharma (P) Ltd.
Modi Cements Ltd. v. Kuchil Kumar Nandi (1998) 3 SCC 249
Hiten P. Dalal v. Bratindranath Banerjee
State of Madras v. A. Vaidyanatha Iyer AIR 1958 SC 61 : 1958 Cri LJ 232
Mallavarapu Kasivisweswara Rao v. Thadikonda Ramulu Firm
Bharat Barrel & Drum Mfg. Co. v. Amin Chand Payrelal (1999) 3 SCC 35
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.