Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was maintainable after the financier had repossessed and sold the vehicle under the hire-purchase arrangement, thereby extinguishing the subsisting liability.
Analysis: Section 138 applies only where the cheque is issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability. Once the financier repossessed the vehicle and thereafter sold it, the hire-purchase arrangement stood determined, and the amount recoverable stood confined to the balance, if any, to be pursued by appropriate civil remedy. A cheque retained or filled up as security after such determination could not be treated as supported by consideration or as issued towards a live and enforceable liability.
Conclusion: The complaint under Section 138 was not maintainable on the facts, and the criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed in favour of the petitioner.
Final Conclusion: The dishonoured cheque did not represent an enforceable debt after repossession and sale of the vehicle, so the prosecution under Section 138 could not continue.
Ratio Decidendi: For an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the cheque must be referable to a legally enforceable debt or liability subsisting on the date of its issuance and presentation; once the underlying transaction stands determined and consideration fails, the provision is not attracted.