Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Second or Successive Presentation of Cheque The law permits the holder to make successive presentations of a cheque, especially if the first presentation was unsuccessful due to reasons like account closed or payment stopped. The Supreme Court in Palaniappan and Another (2013 SCC 177) and Mahindra Vadideni (Criminal Appeal Nos.26-27/2019) affirmed that initiating prosecution based on a second or subsequent dishonor of the same cheque is maintainable, provided it falls within the statutory period (generally six months from the date of dishonor) ["2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 878"], ["2022 0 Supreme(Ori) 16"].
Legal Validity of Re-Presentation after Dishonor The courts recognize that re-presenting a cheque after the first dishonor is permissible, especially if the initial dishonor was due to a non-fund-based reason like account closed. The Leathers case clarified that a subsequent statutory notice after re-presentation is also valid and maintainable ["2022 0 Supreme(Ori) 16"].
Statutory Notice and Limitation A statutory notice must be issued within the prescribed period (usually 30 days from the dishonor). If the first notice is time-barred or the cheque was dishonored for reasons like payment stopped, subsequent notices and re-presentations are still permissible, making the complaint maintainable ["2006 0 Supreme(Del) 2383"], ["2023 0 Supreme(Del) 5769"].
Disputed Facts and Civil Discharge If the accused claims the liability was discharged (e.g., payment made or cheque was stale), the maintainability of the complaint depends on whether these facts are disputed and proven. Courts generally do not quash complaints based on disputed facts unless the facts clearly show discharge or invalid presentation ["2024 0 Supreme(All) 212"].
Revalidation and Validity of the Cheque The presentation must be within the cheque's validity period (six months from the date of issue). If the cheque is presented after this period, the prosecution may be barred, but re-presentation within the validity period after initial dishonor remains valid ["2023 0 Supreme(Guj) 1235"].
Multiple Notices and Presentations Courts have upheld the maintainability of complaints based on subsequent notices and presentations, emphasizing that failure to issue a second notice after re-presentation does not automatically invalidate the complaint if the second presentation is within time and the notice is issued accordingly ["2022 0 Supreme(Ori) 16"], ["1965 0 Supreme(Cal) 231"].
The legal position, as established by Supreme Court judgments and high courts, confirms that complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act based on a second notice after re-presentation of the cheque are generally maintainable. The key conditions include:
Therefore, complaints based on a second notice after re-presentation of the cheque are maintainable provided these conditions are met. Courts emphasize that successive presentations and notices are permissible and do not violate the provisions of the NI Act, ensuring that the debtor's opportunity to discharge the debt is preserved.
References:- Palaniappan and Another, 2013 SCC 177- Mahindra Vadideni, Cr. Appeal Nos.26-27/2019- Leathers case, (Supreme Court)- Various High Court judgments (e.g., 2006 0 Supreme(Del) 2383, 2022 0 Supreme(Ori) 16)
In the fast-paced world of business transactions, cheques remain a common payment method in India. However, when a cheque bounces due to or other reasons, payees often wonder: Can a cheque be presented again after issuing a to the payee? This question arises frequently under (), which penalizes cheque dishonour.
This blog post breaks down the legal position, drawing from authoritative judicial decisions. We'll explore whether multiple presentations and subsequent notices are permissible, key precedents, exceptions, and practical considerations. Note: This is general information based on case law and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
creates a criminal offence for dishonour of cheques issued for discharge of a . The process typically involves:- Presentation of the cheque to the bank.- Dishonour and return memo.- Issuance of a within 30 days of dishonour.- Failure to pay within 15 days of notice receipt, triggering a .
A common misconception is that issuing the first notice exhausts all remedies. However, courts have clarified that the cheque's (usually 3 months from issue) allows for multiple presentations.
Satishkumar Premchand Jain VS Krishnagopal Mohanlal Sarda - Dishonour Of Cheque (1993)
The law explicitly permits presenting the same cheque multiple times during its . The primary goal is to enable debt recovery, not repeated penalization. Judicial decisions confirm that a after re-presentation and dishonour is permissible, and a complaint based on it is maintainable.
In MSR Leathers v. S. Palaniappan (2013), the held: there is no prohibition against issuing a second or successive and filing a complaint based on the second dishonour.
This overruled earlier views that a single arises only once.
Key points:- Multiple presentations are allowed within validity.
Satishkumar Premchand Jain VS Krishnagopal Mohanlal Sarda - Dishonour Of Cheque (1993)
- under Section 138 arises after dishonour, notice, and non-payment within 15 days—but subsequent dishonours enable fresh notices. 2019 1 Supreme 516- Fresh cause doesn't arise each time, but a new right to prosecute via second notice does.
Courts emphasize: multiple dishonours do not, per se, give rise to multiple causes of action, but they do not prohibit issuing subsequent notices.
Satishkumar Premchand Jain VS Krishnagopal Mohanlal Sarda - Dishonour Of Cheque (1993)
The apex court reaffirmed that re-presentation is valid, and on second dishonour is maintainable if notice follows properly. This shifted from stricter interpretations like Sadanandan Bhadran v. Madhavan Sunil Kumar (1998), which limited to one cause but has been nuanced.
These precedents underscore that once the first notice period lapses without payment, payees retain options for re-presentation. 2019 1 Supreme 516
While re-presentation is generally allowed, pitfalls exist:
: Presentation beyond validity (e.g., 3 months) may invalidate. One case restricted complaints to valid cheques only, quashing stale ones but upholding others. 2022 0 Supreme(J&K) 250 Merely because one of cheques... had become stale before its presentation... would not offer ground for quashment of complaint as a whole. 2022 0 Supreme(J&K) 250
Notice Timing: Must issue within 30 days of each dishonour. Failure for first presentation bars relying on it later without fresh cause. In one appeal, acquittal upheld as notice missed limitation for initial presentation. 2023 0 Supreme(Mad) 3193 The appellant failed to issue notice within limitation period for the first presentation. 2023 0 Supreme(Mad) 3193
Material Alterations: Altering dates for 're-validation' voids the cheque. A dismissal noted: the alteration of the date on the cheques constituted a , making the cheques void. 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 503
Exhaustion of First Cause: Second complaint valid only if prior notice properly served and lapsed. Some older views (pre-MSR) forfeited rights post-first notice, but overruled. 2004 0 Supreme(Bom) 1294 Once notice is given, right to file complaint... gets forfeited. (Precedent nuanced now.) 2004 0 Supreme(Bom) 1294
: Under , courts may award up to 20% but must reason quantum. 2022 0 Supreme(J&K) 250
Always ensure compliance: endorse part payments if directed, avoid alterations. 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 503
For payees:- Re-present promptly within validity to trigger fresh notice.- Issue each notice per : specify amount, dishonour reason, 15-day demand.- Document all bank memos, postings.- If first notice unserved (e.g., door locked), re-present and notify again—but track timelines. 2009 0 Supreme(AP) 701
For drawers:- Respond to notices promptly; non-reply invokes presumption of debt.-
under ... operates against him.
Legal practitioners should guide: issuing multiple notices after successive dishonours is permissible.
Generally, yes—a cheque can be re-presented after the first , and a second notice-based complaint is maintainable, as affirmed by the in MSR Leathers.
This facilitates debt recovery while protecting legitimate transactions.
Key Takeaways:- Multiple presentations allowed within validity.
- Second notices valid post each dishonour. 2019 1 Supreme 516- Watch for staleness, alterations, timelines. 2022 0 Supreme(J&K) 250 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 503- Cause arises once per notice cycle, but fresh rights emerge.
Stay informed on updates. For tailored advice, contact a legal expert. Share your experiences in comments!
References:1.
- MSR Leathers v. S. Palaniappan.2.
Satishkumar Premchand Jain VS Krishnagopal Mohanlal Sarda - Dishonour Of Cheque (1993)
- principles.3. 2019 1 Supreme 516,- Subsequent notices.4. Other cases as cited. #ChequeBounce #NIAct138 #LegalGuide
Palaniappan and Another" reported as 2013 (1) SCC 177, held that there is nothing in the provisions of Section 138 of the Act that forbids the holder of the cheque to make successive presentation of the cheque and institute the criminal complaint based on the second or successive ... dishonour of the cheque on its presentation. ... The issue whether the prosecution #HL_....
it has to be shown that in spite of the receipt of notice of demand, the accused failed to make the payment of cheque amount within fifteen days of receipt of the notice. ... The second ground that has been urged by learned counsel for the petitioner is regarding validity of order dated 23.07.2021/29.07.2021. ... Thus, the contention of the petitioner that this cheque had become stale prior to its #HL_STA....
Notably, in the reply dated 5.11.2015 sent by the applicants to the complainant, there is no mention either regarding premature presentation of the cheque on 6th August, 2015 or any averment relating to the alleged unjustified presentation of the cheque on 19th August, 2015, i.e. after payment of a sum ... According to the learned counsel for the applicants, since the liability, if any, attached to the cheque#HL_....
Thus, presentation of cheque in the bank of drawer within validity period is mandatory. Even as per the Section 72 of the N.I. ... Such presentation is necessarily to be made within six months at the bank on which the cheque is drawn, whether presented personally or through another bank, namely, the collecting bank of the payee.” ... The non presentation of the cheque to the drawee-bank ....
But without issuing notice to the accused, once again presented the cheque for collection second time and then issued notice, thereby allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused. ... The complainant failed to issue notice within limitation period for the first presentation of the cheque and the limitation to issue notice would start after return of #H....
cheque for the second time on 30.11.2010. ... Re-validation of the cheque account :- The second issue, which has been taken into consideration by the trial court is on the aspect of re-validity of the cheque. ... This includes the cheque discounting voucher/promissory note at Exh.32, the disputed cheque issued by the accused at Exh.33, the cheque retur....
Upon immediate presentation of the first cheque, bearing no.069291 dated 15.12.2016 for Rs.4,00,000/- by the respondent, it was returned dishonoured for the reason "Payment Stopped". ... He thus submitted that as the Legal Notice in respect of the said first cheque was time barred, the common Legal Notice for all the four cheques did not fulfil the requirements of Section 138 NI Act, and hence the subject....
Mahindra Vadideni and Others (Criminal Appeal Nos.26-27 of 2019) decided on 8th January, 2019, wherein, it has been held that even a second statutory notice after re-representation of cheque is maintainable in law. ... In Leathers case, the Supreme Court noted that a prosecution based on a second or successive default in payment of the cheque amount should not be imperm....
Act is maintainable. ... statutory notice after re-representation of cheque is maintainable in the Supreme Court noted that a prosecution based on a second or complaint based on the dishonour of the same. ... and successive presentation of a cheque is legally permissible as long as p style="position:absolute;white-space:....
The petitioner had issued a cheque of Rs.3,00,000/- in favour of the opposite party and on presentation, the petitioner’s bank have returned the cheque for having insufficient of funds in the account of the petitioner. ... Dwibedi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the complaint is not maintainable, in view of the fact that the cheque was presented beyond the valid period. ... the ....
He further urged that the complainant-respondent No. 2 issued again second notice dated 4th September 2010 with a story of re-deposit of the said cheque, which was received by the petitioner on 9th September 2010. In support of his contention, learned advocate Mr. Mansuri has relied upon decision of this Court in case of Pruthvish B. Dave v. State of Gujarat & Anr., reported in 2000 [1] GCD 114 and by the Apex Court in case of Sadanandan Bhadran v. Madhavan Sunil Kumar, reported in 1998 [6] #H....
It is this which is sought to be questioned in this appeal. It was opined that on issuing the first notice dated 25.4.2007, the complainant had exercised the right to proceed against the accused. If no complaint was filed, the complainant forfeited his right to do so and could not issue a second notice and file a complaint on a re-presentation of the cheque in question.
It is this which is sought to be questioned in this appeal. It was opined that on issuing the first notice dated 25.4.2007, the complainant had exercised the right to proceed against the accused. If no complaint was filed, the complainant forfeited his right to do so and could not issue a second notice and file a complaint on a re-presentation of the cheque in question.
2002 which was issued after dishonour of the cheque for second time and whether the complaint is maintainable based on such cause of action? 2002 which was issued after dishonour of the cheque for second time and whether the complaint is maintainable based on such cause of action? ( 8 ) ACCORDING to the complainant, the accused borrowed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-from him for business purpose and executed promissory note on 21. ( 7 ) IN view of the rival content....
A similar contention advanced on behalf of the respondent has been negatived by this Court construing the relevant provisions of sections 138, 141 and 142 of the Act in Sadanandan Bhadran vs. It is submitted that there is no bar to re-present the cheque so long as the cheque is valid and it was therefore open to the respondent to file a complaint after the issuance of the second notice. However, the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent is that one-month period....
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
