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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 1832

AMAN CHAUDHARY
Nandini Acharya – Appellant
Versus
Mahesh Sharma – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Parties : Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Mr. Paramdeep Singh, Mr. Anand Kumar Bishnoi

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case and parties involved (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments concerning the revision and summoning (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's need for adherence to hearing rights (Para 5 , 6)
4. accused's right to be heard in revision appeals (Para 7 , 9)
5. order for remittance and directive for fresh decision (Para 10 , 11 , 12)

Judgment

Mr. Aman Chaudhary, J. :-CRM-5562-2023

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and reply on behalf of the respondent is taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

CRM-M-12362-2019

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the impugned order dated 01.06.2018, Annexure P-4, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram.

2. The facts in brief as emerge from the complaint are that the petitioner-accused is a designated partner of the firm, namely M/s Coral Travel Party Saga LLP., which took an amount of Rs. 17 lac from the respondent-complainant. In order to discharge its liability, a cheque amounting Rs. 5 lac was issued, which on presentation was dishonoured, leading to filing of the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against thr

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