LawMirror.com

Results of ni 138 cross examination

Showing : 1-10 of 32 Results

SIKKIM HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2020
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138 -- Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Legally enforceable liability - Accused admitted his liability to repay amount mentioned in Written agreement between parties - There is thus, no escaping fact that it was a legally enforceable liability - Evidence was led before Court pertaining to financial capacity of complainant thereby..........

MADRAS HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2020
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138 -- Dishonour of three cheques - Cheques issued towards payment of supply of yarn to accused - All the cheques dishonoured even on repeated presentation - After presentation of cheques in first time complainant sent a letter informing accused about dishonour and requesting him to settle the amount - Said letter was marked by..........

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 139 -- Dishonour of cheque - Rebuttal - Plea of false assertions raised in reply to the notice - Assertion raised in reply to the notice admitted to be correct by complainant in his cross examination - Held, complaint and sworn statement are unsubstantiated - Accused acquitted...........

KERALA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 137 -- Dishonour of cheque - An accused is not entitled to give evidence on affidavit - Affidavit of examinatio, i, chief of accused is no examinatio, i, chief of accused - Tendering of a witness for cross examination, without conducting examinatio, i, chief amounts to giving up of the witness -..........

DELHI HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2017
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 145(2), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 311, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 137 -- Dishonour of cheque - Dismissal of application u/ss 145(2) of NI Act and 311 Cr.P.C. - Means obstruction in bringing out evidence on record - Court is duty bound to allow cross-examination of witness whose examination-in-chief has already..........

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2017
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138 -- Dishonour of cheque - Appeal against acquittal - Complaint through attorney - Attorney himself admitted in his cross-examination that he has no knowledge about the case - Even, no date, month or year of transaction has been mentioned by complainant - Moreover, there is no document on record to show transaction between the..........

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2012
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 200 -- Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Complainant's statement-i, chief - Held, it could be on affidavit although it is open to call him for cross-examination in exercise of power u/sub-s.(2) of S.145 of NI Act...........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2012
Details

Constitution of India, 1950, Article 32,20(3),21,226, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482,483, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 420,468,471 -- Criminal complaint filed against respondent No.2 by petitioner u/s 138 NI Act - Contention on behalf of petitioner that his cross-examination at behest of respondent No.2 is..........

DELHI HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2012
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 118(a), 139 -- Dishonour of cheque - Acquittal - Leave to appeal - Respondent No.2 rebutted presumption provided u/s.118(a) and S.139 of NI Act, 1881 by denying that he had received Rs.80,000/- from petitioner - By eliciting testimony from petitioner that he had no proof of payment of Rs.80,000/- to respondent No.2 and that he..........

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2012
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 139 -- Dishonour of cheque - Legally enforceable debt/liability - Appellant-complainant admitted in his cross-examination that he had given Rs.1,50,000/- to "S" and that he had never met accused prior to coming to court - The said defence was also raised by accused while giving reply to notice served by complainant - Held,..........

Showing : 1-10 of 32 Results