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

2024 Supreme(Mad) 918

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Srinivasha Fashions Private Limited and Srinivasa Exports International, Rep. by its Managing Director, Coppa Vasudevarao Ravindran & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
N.A.S. Periyasamy - Respondent
Crl.O.P.No.2893 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.Nos.1704 and 1705 of 2023
Decided On : 08-02-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Y. Kajanavas.

IMPORTANT POINT
A cheque that is presented for encashment must reflect the total legally enforceable debt, and any part payments made prior to its presentation must be endorsed on the cheque; failure to do so negates the applicability of Section 138 of the NI Act.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL LAW - CHEQUE DISHONOUR - NI ACT - SECTION 56, CRPC - SECTION 482 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 56 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which mandates that any part payment of a debt must be endorsed on the cheque. The court interpreted that if a cheque is presented for an amount that does not reflect the legally enforceable debt due to part payments made prior to its encashment, the offence under Section 138 cannot be attracted. The court relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Dashrathbhai Trikambhai Patel Vs. Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel, emphasizing that a dishonoured cheque must represent a legally enforceable debt at the time of presentation.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought to quash the proceedings in STC.No.617/2022, arguing that they had made part payments totaling Rs.11,00,000/- against a claimed debt of Rs.16,00,227/-. The cheque for the full amount was presented for encashment despite these payments.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the cheque presented did not represent a legally enforceable debt due to the part payments made by the petitioners. It noted that the cheque could not be encashed without endorsing the part payment as required by Section 56 of the NI Act.

Issues: Whether the cheque presented for encashment represented a legally enforceable debt at the time of its presentation, considering the part payments made by the petitioners.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that for an offence under Section 138 to be established, the cheque must represent a legally enforceable debt at the time of its presentation. Since the petitioners had made part payments that were not endorsed on the cheque, the cheque did not represent a legally enforceable debt.

Final Decision: The court quashed the proceedings in STC.No.617/2022, allowing the criminal original petition and closing the connected miscellaneous petitions.

ORDER :

N. Anand Venkatesh, J.

[PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the proceedings in STC.No.617/2022 on the file of Fast Track Court, Judicial Magistrate No.II, Erode.]

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in S.T.C.No.617/2022 on the file of the Fast Track, Judicial Magistrate No.II, Erode.

2. When the matter came up for hearing on 10.02.2023, this Court passed the following order :

This petition is filed to call for the records connected with the S.T.C.No.617/2022 on the file of the Fast Track, Judicial Magistrate No.II, Erode and quash the same.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is claimed in the complaint that the due from the petitioners was Rs.16,00,227/- as on October 2018. The impugned cheques were given on 26.11.2018 and on 25.01.2019. Petitioners made payment of Rs.8,00,000/- on 14.01.2019 and Rs.3,00,000/- on 01.03.2019. Without taking into consideration these payments, the cheque was presented for collection for the total amount of Rs.16,00,227/-. In such circumstances, this Court orders notice to respondent, returnable in three weeks.

3. There shall be an order of interim stay of all further proceedings in S.T.C.No.617/2022 on the file of the Fast Track, Judicial Magistrate No.II, Erode, till then.

4. Personal appearance of the petitioners in STC No.617/2022 is dispensed with till then.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. The respondent has been served with notice and the name of the respondent has also been printed in the cause list. There is no representation either in person or through counsel.

4. As noted in the earlier order passed on 10.02.2023, the petitioners had paid a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- between 14.01.2019 to 01.03.2019 out of the total amount that was due and payable to the tune of Rs.16,00,227/-. However, the cheque for the entire amount of Rs.16,00,227/- was presented by the respondent.

5. To substantiate the above claim, the bank account statement of the petitioners maintained in Corporation Bank was also produced before this Court. It is seen that a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- was debited in the account of the petitioners on 14.01.2019 and this amount was transferred to the respondent through RTGS. That apart, yet another sum of Rs.3,00,000/- was also debited on 01.03.2019 and the amount was transferred through RTGS to the respondent. In view of the same, out of the total amount of Rs.16,00,227/-, the petitioners had already repaid back a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- by 01.03.2019. However, on 18.03.2019, the respondent deposits the cheque for a sum of Rs.16,00,227/-.

6. Where there is part payment of the debt, the payment must be endorsed on a cheque under Section 56 of the NI Act and the cheque cannot be presented for encashment without recording the part payment. If the unendorsed cheque is dishonoured on presentation, the offence under Section 138 would not be attracted since the cheque did not represent a legally enforceable debt at the time of encashment. Useful reference can be made to the judgment of the Apex Court in Dashrathbhai Trikambhai Patel Vs. Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel and others reported in MANU/SC/1294/2022 and the relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder :

''29. Under Section 56 read with Section 15 of the Act, an endorsement may be made by recording the part-payment of the debt in the cheque or in a note appended to the cheque. When such an endorsement is made, the instrument could still be used to negotiate the balance amount. If the endorsed cheque when presented for encashment of the balance amount is dishonoured, then the drawee can take recourse to the provisions of Section 138.Thus, when a part-payment of the debt is made after the cheque was drawn but before the cheque is encashed, such payment must be endorsed on the cheque under Section 56 of the Act. The cheque cannot be presented for encashment without recording the part payment. If the unendorsed cheque is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top