9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 745X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... presentation of the cheque. Another point that was submitted by learned counsel Sri.Chokka Reddy for respondents is that there is an agreement not to take action for first two years on the face of it which defence neither was raised nor could be accepted to exonerate the accused. Learned counsel for appellant submits the complainant is not affluent and it is very difficult for him to tolerate the financial burden. The cheque admittedly is issued in respect of existing legally recoverable debt and there was mandatory obligation and accused had issued the cheques in discharge of the obligation and that came to be dishonoured and tried to raise hyper technical issues against the substantive rights which cannot be accepted and on the other han ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tor and Accused No.3 is the Director of accused No.1-company and signatory to the cheque. Complainant entered into an agreement with accused company dated 15.08.2012 for setting up `Wider Horizons Spoken English Institute Branch at Banashankari, Bengaluru. As a part of the agreement complainant had invested an amount of ₹ 15,00,000/- and in turn the complainant was entitled to get returns of 10% of net revenue and at the Banashankari Branch or 12% p.a. on the amount invested whichever is higher. As per the agreement, the complainant had made some electronic transfer of ₹ 5,00,000/- on 30.07.2011, ₹ 2,00,000/- on 08.08.2012 and ₹ 8,00,000/- on 13.08.2012 to the account of accused. Towards 12% minimum return of investm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of arising of cause of action. He would also submit that there is an agreement that within two years no investor can take a case against the company. 6. In the overall circumstances of the case offence of a cheque which is a negotiable instrument is contemplated under the Negotiable Instruments Act and it is considered as offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act provided where accused fails to honour a cheque that was duly presented earlier issued by him in discharge of monetary obligation. In such circumstances complainant has to comply with certain formalities such as issuance of notice within 15 days from the date of communication of dishonour and when demand notice is issued giving 15 days time for payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs S.Palaniappan and anr - (2013) 1 SCC 177 2. Sicagen India Limited Vs Mahindra Vadineni and others -(2019) 4 SCC 271 3. Kalaselvi Vs B.G.Patil -2009 SCC Online Kar 757 4. S.M.S.Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs Neeta Bhalla and others -(2005) 8 SCC 89. 9. Now the scope of Section 142(b) to be understood by reading the same which is as under: 142 Cognizance of offences. -- Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)-- (a) no court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under section 138 except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the case may be, the holder in due course of the cheque; (b) such complaint is made within one month of the dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is the authorized signatory to cheque. In the second notice issued address, names are there but notice is addressed to accused No.3. In the light of first presentation due knowledge of impugned notice have thereunder the impact and hyper technicality cannot be allowed to veto the regular process of law. In the context and circumstances I find there is no lacunae in presentation of the cheque. Another point that was submitted by learned counsel Sri.Chokka Reddy for respondents is that there is an agreement not to take action for first two years on the face of it which defence neither was raised nor could be accepted to exonerate the accused. Learned counsel for appellant submits the complainant is not affluent and it is very difficult for hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
