Supreme Court Judgement on Dishonour of Cheque and Offence u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act

[@casansaarca]

Please don't forget to Like, Share and Subscribe, That's the minimum you can do to appreciate our efforts and boost our morale. Thanks in advance.

[@AdvSantoshCZalteSillodDistAura]

Thanks for your Best information about Negotiable instrument act with Great regards and Lots of Blessings to you and your family 👪 🙏

[@sonipooja4873]

Nice video #good for knowledge#

[@vivekkhurana4774]

Thank you very much

[@SameerKumar-qu2js]

How to endorse part payments? If 20 lakh chque is received....

[@vivekkhurana4774]

Thank you very much

[@camanmohanjindal]

Good presentation . Section 56 of NI Act No writing on a negotiable instrument is valid for the purpose of negotiation if such writing purports to transfer only a part of the amount appearing to be due on the instrument; but where such amount has been partly paid, a note to that effect may be indorsed on the instrument, which may then be negotiated for the balance.

[@casansaarca]

True

[@ranisingh7064]

Well explained sir

[@vivekkhurana4774]

Thanks a lot

[@WakilSaheb-dz7mh]

Thanks 🙏

[@ajayjain7197]

Happy Birthday

[@vivekkhurana4774]

Thank you very much

[@casansaarca]

Can a Court Impose Fine more than Twice the Amount of the Cheque in Cheque Bounce Case under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act? Kerala High Court Judgement in Cheque Bounce Case. kzbin.info/www/bejne/gqrLqqaFmN54jLc

[@sandipshah5815]

Sir. You mean to say that complainant should write in his first Notice served to drawer of cheque that we have received four lakh part payment from you and now balance 16 lakhs is recoverable? For 16 lakhs complainant is allowed to maintain his 138 case against drawer of cheque ? Above acknowledgement if not mentioned in notice to drawer of cheque then only his complaint will be dismissed ? Pls clarify with example.becos it will be a trick to dishonest drawer of cheque otherwise. That first cheque of huge amount to be given then make part payment of say 5 % of whole debt and if drawee fails to notify having received 5 % in notice to drawer his balance 95 % will be forgone. ? Whole issue is mentioning of aaceptance of 5 % ? Pls clarify

[@vivekkhurana4774]

Yes you are right

[@gsvrao3216]

As a matter of fact the private as well as govt lawyers get benefitted by this act,many were earlier are not actual registered money lenders,do not pay income tax,as such both are offences on the part of lenders,where from the money given is to be established,the source of money is to be,white paper on which signatures taken,means it is for deceiving barower later filled up as required questioned,blanck cheques given later filled by lenders will not be honoured but ignoring all magisrate give judgement is a clear proof of breach of rule,will not stand in higher court,how a person give lending business without registration of vender with govt,all these aspects must come into account,wrong judgements will remove jobs of judges,lender must maintain register of amounts& get audited every year otherwise judge have to verify those aspects,simply amount insufficient when present in bank is not creteria,it is only benifit private lawyers& giving amounts dealings in such cases,if rs 25,000/crossed payment by cheque must be given by lender if not case will loose case,as such crores of cases are pending in courts without finalisation due to non observation of court stripilstions,why canot courts finaliase cases early,public must question courts

[@satutimahajan3927]

Happy birthday 🎉🎉

[@vivekkhurana4774]

Thanks 🙏