Discharge in 138 NI Act - The accused was involved in a financial transaction with the petitioner, involving invoices and an outstanding amount of INR 48,46,104/-. Despite the petitioner issuing invoices and maintaining a running account, the accused failed to discharge the amount owed, leading to legal proceedings. However, the sources do not specify that the accused was discharged under the 138 NI Act; rather, they highlight the ongoing dispute over the outstanding payment. M/S SHREE KARANGAR TEXTILES (P) LTD. (THROUGH ITS vs THE STATE (THROUGH SHO OF P.S. KESHAV PURAM) & ORS - Delhi
Cheque Dishonour and Legal Proceedings - The accused issued a cheque in Chandigarh which was dishonoured. The complainant issued a demand notice at Chandigarh, and subsequent legal actions were taken in Delhi, where the accused failed to make the payment. The Delhi High Court dismissed the accused's petition, confirming the continuation of legal proceedings related to cheque dishonour. There is no indication from the sources that the accused has been discharged from charges under the 138 NI Act; instead, the case appears to be ongoing or unresolved. Prakiti Enterprisers VS Super Health Care - Dishonour Of Cheque
Analysis and Conclusion:
Based on the provided sources, there is no explicit information indicating that the accused has been discharged under the 138 NI Act. The case involves non-payment of dues and cheque dishonour, with legal proceedings ongoing or dismissed at certain stages, but no final discharge is documented.
Paras 6, 7) ... ... Facts of the case: ... The petitioner sought to register an FIR against the accused ... The Petitioner issued various invoices and bills against the purchase of the aforesaid goods, and opened a separate running account in the name of Accused firm. This account now reflects an outstanding amount of INR 48,46,104/-, which is yet to be discharged by the accused persons. ... The Accused approached the Petitioner Company for supply of goods like fabric and materials, and provided assur....
He presented the cheque given by the accused at Chandigarh. The cheque was dishonoured at Chandigarh. The complainant issued a notice upon the accused asking him to pay the amount from New Delhi. The said notice was served on the accused at Chandigarh. ... The learned Sessions Judge also observed that the accused failed to make payment at Delhi as the demand was made from Delhi and the payment was to be made to the complainant at Delhi. The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition filed by the accused. T....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.