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

2023 Supreme(HP) 249

VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
Sumitra Devi – Appellant
Versus
Kapoor Chand – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr.Tejasvi Verma, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr.Hoshiyar Singh Rangra, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

Petitioner, complainant in case No. 118-3 of 2013, titled as Sumitra Devi Vs. Kapoor Chand, filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short ‘NI Act’), has approached this Court against rejection of application filed by her for her reexamination, vide order dated 28.1.2020 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anni, District Kullu, H.P. (Trial Court).

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the material placed before me.

3. Petitioner has preferred a complaint under NI Act for dishonor of cheque issued by respondent Kapoor Chand for payment towards her salary, claiming that the said cheque was issued by respondent as Director of BHK construction Company. An affidavit in evidence, in examination-in-chief, has been filed by the petitioner and thereafter, she was subjected to cross-examination on behalf of respondent, wherein at one place she had admitted it to be correct that respondent was also an employee of the Company like her. At the Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes time of her cross-examination, no liberty was prayed by her counsel to re-exa


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