Advanced Search Results

Rakesh Nemkumar Porwal Vs. Narayan Dhondu Joglekar

Court : Mumbai

Subject : CompanyCriminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138, 139 and 142; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 178

Reported in : 1994(3)BomCR355; [1993]78CompCas822(Bom); 1993CriLJ680; 1993(1)MhLj630

consequence having regard to the fact that they concern the ambit and scope of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. This recently introduced proviso of law was specially placed on the statute book for purposes of making

Orkay Industries Limited and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra and O ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 and 141; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 482; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 227(2), 441(2), 442, 446 and 536(2); Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227; Displaced Persons (Debt Adjustment) Act, 1951 - Sections 20; Social Security Act, 1975; Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963

Reported in : 1998(3)BomCR415; 2000BomCR(Cri)14

these petitions the petitioners pray that the proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate Courts, under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, be quashed. In some of these petitions a prayer is also made that undertakings given by the concerned

Dada Silk Mills and ors. Vs. Indian Overseas Bank and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Company

Acts : Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 - Sections 138

Reported in : [1995]82CompCas35(Guj); 1994CriLJ2874

of Criminal Procedure raises an interesting question of interpretation of section 138, read with section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act' for the brevity). The question raised is as to whether

Heerachand Vs. Jeevraj and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 118; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 3; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 100-101

Reported in : AIR1959Raj1

mulated as below :1. Whether the rule as to presumption of consideration embodied in section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is a technical provision which can come into play only where the Negotiable Instruments Act is in force

Selvaraj, S/O Gnanadesihan Vs. P. Viswanathan

Court : Chennai

Subject : Banking Food Adulteration

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 -- Sections 138 and 142; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 -- Sections 29, 167(2), and 325(1); Banking Public Financial Institution and Negotiable Instruments Laws (Amended) Act, 1988 (Act 66 of 1988) -- Sections 139, 140, 141 and 142; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 -- Sections 25, 26, 190, 200, 207, 262 to 265, 347, 372 to 379 and 468(1); Supreme Court Advocates (Practice in High Courts) Act, 1951 -- Sections 2; Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 -- Sections 4(2) and 8(1), 9(4), 14(3) and 15; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 -- Sections 20, 27, 36-A, 37 and 51; Criminal Justice Act, 1948 -- Sections 23; Special Court Act, 1982 -- Sections 11(1); Constitution of India, Articles 132, 133, 134 and 136; Preventio

Reported in : 1999(2)ALD(Cri)438; 1999CriLJ4766; 1999(2)CTC652

such Magistrate under the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in respect of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.'2. The following factual matrix would be necessary to understand the controversy:- The accused Selvaraj, who was a

Mr.M.Palanichamy. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Chennai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138,; Code of Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 482, 177, 178, 179, 156(3); , 202Constitution of India - Articles 226, 227

the case of the petitioner that suppressing the same, the advertising company has filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, on the file of Learned 62nd Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Dada, Mumbai, against … of Declaration and set at naught the proceedings initiated on a private complaint under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, before the criminal court outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Madras High Court is the moot question

Bombay Mercantile Bank Ltd. Vs. Oriol Industries Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Company

Acts : Indian Limitation Act - Sections 22; Negotiable Instruments Act - Sections 26 and 27; Companies Act - Sections 89

Reported in : AIR1956Bom57; (1955)57BOMLR1039; [1955]25CompCas479(Bom); ILR1955Bom1072

negotiable instrument, and although, as we pointed out, the same principle is enunciated in section 27 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, section 89 of the Companies Act emphasises that principle and makes it clear that a company will not be

Prashant Vs. S.K. Sarkar

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act - Sections 138 and 142; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 482; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 420

Reported in : 2002(2)ALD(Cri)953; 2002BomCR(Cri)672; 2002CriLJ3001; 2002(2)MhLj125

Shinde, learned Counsel for the applicant, contended that the applicant/complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for the sake of brevity, it will be referred as an Act) against the non-applicant in the Court

Ksl and Industries Ltd., (Formerly Known as Krishna Texport Industries ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 to 142, 145 and 145(1); Banking, Public Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Law (Amendment) Act, 1988; Negotiable Instruments (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2002; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 251 and 281; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 417 and 420

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD(Cri)45; 2005(2)ALLMR581; III(2005)BC500; 2005CriLJ1201

Dalveer Bhandari, C.J.1. All these petitions emanate from the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the Act'). Therefore, we propose to decide these petitions by a common judgment.2. These petitions

Jaikumar Shivlal Shah and ors. Vs. Motilal Hirachand Gandhi and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Civil

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 4 and 13; Stamp Act, 1899 - Sections 2(5), 2(22) and 36; Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 Sections 35 and 58

Reported in : AIR1973Bom27; (1972)74BOMLR174; ILR1972Bom816; 1972MhLJ405

it is payable to a certain person, and thus satisfies all the requirements of Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.5. Before I proceed to discuss these rival contentions, it is necessary to refer to one fact and