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

2001 Supreme(MP) 207

FAIZAN UDDIN
ANTIL KUMAR HARITWAL – Appellant
Versus
SANT PRAKASH GUPTA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.BARUA, N.K.MODI, PADAM SINGH, Surabhi Singh, Sushil Chaturvedi, V.K.Saxena, V.Sunderam

FAKHRUDDIN, J.

( 1 ) THIS order shall govern the disposal of all the aforesaid three revision- petitions.

( 2 ) CRI. Revn. 344 and 412 of 2000 have been filed against the order dated 29-8-2000, passed by the trial Court whereby the application moved under Section 142-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, hereinafter referred to 'n. I. Act', where under the objection raised regarding competency to file complaint by a person in question has been rejected and the complaint was held to be maintainable, taking cognizance in the matter.

( 3 ) THE facts of Crl. Revn. No. 344/2000 are that the complainant Sant Prakash Gupta had made a complaint under Sec. 138 of the N. I. Act, as per Annexure P/1, against the petitioners-accused on the ground that the petitioners/accused took a loan in the sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- from the respondent/complainant through cheque No. 485117, dated 11-6-96 and in lieu thereof they had executed a promissory note in favour of the complainant to the effect that on demand they will return the payment of loan with interest as determined between the parties. The amount was to be returned after twelve months. It was alleged that the amount of interest alone was paid by t




































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