Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2006 (12) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2006 (12) TMI 581 - HC - Indian Laws

Issues involved:
The judgment involves the issue of whether a cheque issued as security can be misutilized by the payee, the significance of admitting signature in a cheque, and the necessity of sending a cheque to an expert for comparison.

Issue 1: Misutilization of a Cheque as Security:
The petitioner, an accused in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, contended that the cheque in question was handed over as a blank signed cheque as security for a loan availed by her husband. The petitioner claimed that the entries in the cheque, apart from the signature, were made by the complainant, and the cheque was being misutilized to make a false claim. The trial court rejected the petitioner's application to send the cheque to an expert, citing the admission of the signature. However, the petitioner maintained that the other entries were not made by her, and the complainant misused the blank signed cheque.

Issue 2: Significance of Admitting Signature in a Cheque:
The judgment clarifies that while admitting the signature in a cheque is crucial, it does not equate to admitting execution. The distinction between admitting signature and admitting execution is emphasized, with the right of the accused to challenge the authenticity of other entries in the cheque preserved. The court must consider all evidence to determine if the admission of signature, along with other circumstances, is sufficient to prove execution.

Issue 3: Necessity of Sending Cheque to an Expert:
The judgment distinguishes the present case from a previous ruling, highlighting that the accused consistently denied making the entries in the cheque, and the complainant asserted that the accused did write the entries. The court directs the petitioner to file a fresh application clearly requesting a comparison of admitted handwriting with the disputed entries. If such a request is made, the cheque will be sent to an expert for comparison. The judgment emphasizes that the complainant may be compensated if found guilty, with directions for payment of interest on the cheque amount if the complainant succeeds.

This summary provides a detailed overview of the issues involved in the judgment, addressing the misutilization of a cheque as security, the significance of admitting signature in a cheque, and the necessity of sending a cheque to an expert for comparison.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates