IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
Gurvinder Singh Toor – Appellant
Versus
Rohit Malhotra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff sought to quash a cheque dishonor complaint. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of this petition, seeking quashing of the Complaint Case No. 2435/2020, titled Rohit Malhotra v. Gurvinder Singh Toor under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881 [hereafter „NI Act‟] pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, West District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi [hereafter „Magistrate‟].
2. Brief facts of the case, as set out in the petition and evident from the complaint filed in this case, are that the petitioner is the Principal Director of a company incorporated under the name Zoi International Company Ltd. [hereafter „the Company‟], which is engaged in the business of textiles and used garments. The respondent herein was also one of the Principal Directors of the Company, holding 45% equity shareholding. He resigned from the directorship of the Company on 06.07.2020. The respondent had initially met the petitioner along with one Mr. Manish Alag in November 2018 to discuss a business project aimed at establishing a branch of the Company in Thailand. Pursuant to these discussions, the respondent decide
Obligations under a Memorandum of Understanding can establish legally enforceable debt, relevant to Section 138 of the NI Act.
The court determined that a legally enforceable debt existed at the time of the cheque's issuance, validating the complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
(1) Dishonour of cheque – At stage of issuance of process, statutory presumption under Section 139 of N.I. Act cannot be dislodged in a summary manner merely by contending that cheque issued was not ....
Penal Consequences - There is a statutory presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act in favour of the holder of the Cheque. A prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is ultimately to bring t....
A cheque issued as security does not create criminal liability under Section 138 unless there is a legally enforceable debt at the time of its issuance.
The issuance of a cheque signifies a legally enforceable debt under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, and the burden to prove otherwise lies with the accused, not the complainant.
A legally enforceable debt must exist at the time of cheque presentation for liability under Section 138 of the N.I. Act to arise.
The crucial consideration is whether at the time of presentation of the cheque for encashment, there was a legally enforceable debt or liability due to the complainant from the accused. The nomenclat....
Cheques issued remain enforceable despite concurrent civil suits; unilateral cessation of payment does not negate liabilities under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Point of law: Question whether a post-dated cheque is for “discharge of debt or liability” depends on the nature of the transaction.
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.