AI Overview...
-
Ashwini Satish Bhat v. Shrijeevan Divakar Lolienkar - The case establishes that when a cheque is issued after the expiry of the limitation period, courts are bound to follow the judgment in Ashwini Satish Bhat, which clarifies the legal stance on cheques issued post-limitation Narendra V. Kanekar VS The Bardez-Taluka Co-op. Housing Mortgage Society Ltd. - Dishonour Of Cheque, Narendra V. Kanekar VS Bardez-Taluka Co-op. Housing Mortgage society Ltd. - Bombay.
-
Limitation and Cheque Validity - Multiple judgments affirm that a cheque issued after the debt becomes time-barred does not constitute a valid promise to pay, aligning with the principles laid down in Ashwini Satish Bhat. The courts emphasize that the issuance of such cheques does not alter the barred status of the debt Manjit Kaur VS Vanita - Punjab and Haryana, Som Nath VS Mukesh Kumar - Punjab and Haryana.
-
Judicial Consistency and Precedents - Courts have consistently referred to Ashwini Satish Bhat to determine the validity of cheques issued post-limitation, and have held that subsequent judgments do not override this precedent. Some decisions also discuss that a cheque can be considered a promise to pay under Section 25(3) of the Contract Act, but this view is subject to the specific facts and the binding precedents Chander Mohan Mehta s/o. late Shri. B. S. Mehta VS William Rosario Fernandes s/o. late Inacio Fernandes - Dishonour Of Cheque, Chander Mohan Mehta s/o. late Shri. B. S. Mehta VS William Rosario Fernandes s/o. late Inacio Fernandes - Bombay.
-
Relevance of Acknowledgment - In cases where acknowledgment of debt occurs before the expiry of limitation, the debt may not be barred, distinguishing such cases from those discussed in Ashwini Satish Bhat, where the debt was already time-barred at the time of cheque issuance Vijay Ganesh Gondhlekar VS Indranil Jairaj Damale - Bombay.
-
Judicial Approach to Limitation and Promissory Nature of Cheques - The decisions highlight that courts tend to follow the judgment in Ashwini Satish Bhat regarding the legal implications of cheques issued after the limitation period, emphasizing that such cheques do not constitute a valid promise to pay and thus cannot be used to revive barred debts Mr. Joaquim Borges vs Mr. Joao Manuel Silva - Bombay, Ashok Kumar Das VS State of Orissa - Orissa.
Analysis and Conclusion:
The core insight from the sources is that the judgment in Ashwini Satish Bhat is a binding precedent regarding cheques issued after the debt has become time-barred. Courts consistently follow this ruling, affirming that such cheques do not constitute valid promises to pay under Section 25(3) of the Contract Act, and do not revive barred debts. The decisions also clarify that acknowledgment before limitation expiry can affect the debt's status, but post-limitation cheques remain invalid for repayment claims. Overall, Ashwini Satish Bhat serves as a guiding precedent in cases involving the validity of cheques issued after the expiry of limitation periods.
Search Results for "Ashwini Satish Bhat Supra"
• India - Dishonour Of Cheque
N.A.BRITTO
Satish Bhat v. ... The learned Division Bench of the Kerala High Court has in terms not followed the said three decision noted hereinabove, including the Judgment of this court in the case of Ashwini Satish Bhat v. Shrijeevan Divakar Lolienkar (supra). ... As far as issue of cheque is concerned, issued after the expiry of period of limitation, then there is no dispute that this court would be bound to follow the Judgment in the case of Ashwini Satish....
2006 0 Supreme(Bom) 651 • India - Bombay
N.A.BRITTO
Ashwini satish Bhat Vs. Shrijeevan Divakar lolienkar (1999 (1) G. 1. T. 408) and Joseph vs. Devassia (2003 K. 1. ... satish Bhat Vs. ... Shrijeevan divakar Lolienkar (supra ). As far as mere issue of cheque is concerned, issued after the expiry of period of limitation, then there is no dispute that this Court would be bound to follow the Judgment in the case of Ashwini satish Bhat Vs. ... ... ( 8 ) THE learned Division Bench of ker....
2009 0 Supreme(P&H) 2048 • India - Punjab and Haryana
HARBANS LAL
In re : Ashwini Satish Bhat (Mrs.) v. Jeevan Divakar Lolienkar, 2000(1) R.C.R. ... So, if the matter is viewed in the background of the observations rendered in re: Ashwini Satish Bhat (Mrs.) (supra), it turns out that the accused- respondent had issued the cheque in 2003 when the debt had already become time barred.
2015 0 Supreme(P&H) 1184 • India - Punjab and Haryana
SABINA
So, if the matter is viewed in the background of the observations rendered in re: Ashwini Satish Bhat (Mrs.) (supra), it turns out that the accused- respondent had issued the cheque in 2003 when the debt had already become time barred. ... Natarajan’s case (supra), the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner fail to advance the case of the petitioner. ... 9. No ground for interference by this Court is made out.
• India - Dishonour Of Cheque
N.A.BRITTO
Bardez Taluka Coop Housing Mortgage (supra), this Court had observed thus: ... "As far as mere issue of cheque is concerned, issued after the expiry of period of limitation, then there is no dispute that this Court will be bound to follow the Judgment in the case of Ashwini Satish Bhat ... Although the primary question answered by the Division Bench was that a cheque defines a promise to pay under Section 25(3) of the Contract Act, this view need not be followed by this Court in the light of the Judgment of this Court in....
2008 0 Supreme(Bom) 1278 • India - Bombay
N.A.BRITTO
Bardez Taluka Coop Housing Mortgage (supra), this Court had observed thus: ... "As far as mere issue of cheque is concerned, issued after the expiry of period of limitation, then there is no dispute that this Court will be bound to follow the Judgment in the case of Ashwini Satish Bhat ... Although the primary question answered by the Division Bench was that a cheque defines a promise to pay under Section 25(3) of the Contract Act, this view need not be followed by this Court in the light of the Judgment of this Court in....
2007 0 Supreme(Bom) 1427 • India - Bombay
C.L.PANGARKAR
Ashwini Satish Bhat Vs. Shri Jeewan Divakar II (1999) BC 519. This decision has no bearing on the case at hand as in the case at hand there is an acknowledgment before expiry of limitation. ... 7. ... Although the primary question answered by the Division Bench was that a cheque becomes a promise to pay under Section 25(3) of the Contract Act, this view need not be followed by this Court in the light of the Judgment of this Court in the case of Ashwini Satish Bhat Vs. ... Shrijeevan D....
• India - Dishonour Of Cheque
JAWAHAR LAL GUPTA, KURIAN JOSEPH
Ashwini Satish Bhat v. Shri Jeevan Divakar3 and Joseph v. Devassia (supra). ... 19. We have examined these decisions.
• India - Bombay High Court - Bench at Goa
N. A. BRITTO, J
Although the primary question answered by the Division Bench was that a cheque becomes a promise to pay under Section 25(3) of the Contract Act, this view need not be followed by this Court in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Ashwini Satish Bhat v. ... Shrijeevan Divakar Lolienkar (supra) and the other two judgments referred to hereinabove.
2017 0 Supreme(Ori) 449 • India - Orissa
S.K.SAHOO
Learned counsel further placed reliance on another decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Ashwini Satish Bhat (Mrs.) -Vrs. ... To that extent, the impugned observations in Krishna Janardhan Bhat -Vrs.-Dattatraya G. Hegde (2008) 4 Supreme Court Cases 54, may not be correct. ... -Jeevan Divakar Lolienkar reported in 2000(2) Civil Court Cases 115 (Bombay) wherein the ratio laid down in the case of Girdhari Lal Rathi (supra) was followed and similar view was taken. ... 9.
Filter by Legal Phrase
