Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.ILANGOVAN
K.K.D.Pandian – Appellant
Versus
S.Tamilselvi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court's observations on public policy and enforceable debts. (Para 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 12 , 19) |
| 3. arguments regarding legality of claims under section 138. (Para 6 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. principles on illegal contracts and enforceability. (Para 14 , 15 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. conclusion on dishonor of cheques not sufficient for liability. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
G. ILANGOVAN, J.
This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant to set aside the Judgment dated 10.01.2020 made in S.T.C.No.10 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court (FTC) at Theni.
2. The complainant filed a complaint with the following averments:
The accused promised the complainant to get permit for running bus between Yenam and Rajamundry. He demanded Rs.1,10,00,000/-. The complainant paid Rs.40,00,000/- on 08.01.2011 to the accused and her husband and second installment of Rs.25,00,000/- was given on 15.01.2011. The accused involved Ex-Chief Minister of Pondicherry stating that unless the balance amount is paid permit cannot be issued. So the third installment of Rs.45,00,000/- was also given. In spite of receipt of the money, the accused was e
Payments made for illegal purposes do not create legally enforceable obligations, thus dishonour of cheques issued in such contexts cannot lead to prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Inst....
The legality of a transaction affects enforceability; payments for illegal purposes cannot be legally recovered even if a cheque is issued.
An agreement that involves unlawful consideration is void ab initio, and no legally enforceable debt arises from it, which precludes the application of Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act.
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Where complainant’s case is based on a specific claim that money was given for securing a TNSTC job and cheque was issued to repay this amount, there is no legally enforceab....
The presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act applies, placing the burden on the accused to prove that dishonored cheques were issued for security, which he failed to do.
Court will refuse to enforce an illegal agreement at instance of a person who is itself party to an illegality or fraud.
In absence of any corroborative evidence, version of complainant cannot be accepted at its face value.
A drawer of a cheque may incur liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act unless they can sufficiently rebut the statutory presumptions of consideration and debt.
Dishonour of cheque – Appeal against acquittal has to be sustained where accused was successful to rebut presumption available to her under Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
