Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court quashes Section 138 proceedings, orders compensation deposit.</h1> <h3>M/s Som Power Pvt. Limited And Others Versus M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.</h3> M/s Som Power Pvt. Limited And Others Versus M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Quashing of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.2. Maintainability of petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.3. Settlement proposal and compensation.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Quashing of Proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881:The petitioners sought to quash the proceedings pending against them in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Special Judge, Bhopal, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. The case involved dishonored cheques issued by M/s Som Power Pvt. Ltd. (M/S SPPL) towards repayment of financial assistance provided by Madhya Pradesh Industrial Development Corporation (MPSIDC). The total amount of dishonored cheques was Rs. 2,87,23,562. The petitioners argued that they were ready to pay the cheque amount along with an adequate fine, and thus, the pending proceedings should be set aside.2. Maintainability of Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.:The respondent opposed the petition, arguing that the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. was not maintainable. They contended that the petitioners should have made this request before the trial court where the proceedings under Section 138 of the Act, 1881, were pending. The respondent emphasized that it was the prerogative of the trial court to decide on such matters, and the High Court should entertain the petition only if the trial court rejected the request.3. Settlement Proposal and Compensation:The petitioners relied on the Supreme Court decision in the case of Meters and Instruments Private Limited and another Vs. Kanchan Mehta, which observed that the provision under Section 138 of the Act, 1881, was primarily compensatory. The Supreme Court noted that even in the absence of consent from both parties, the court could close the proceedings and discharge the accused if the complainant had been duly compensated. The petitioners argued that since they were ready to pay the entire amount involved in the cheques, there was no reason to keep the cases pending or remand them to the trial court for a formal application.Judgment:The court observed that the proceedings under Section 138 of the Act, 1881, were primarily compensatory, with a punitive element to enforce the compensatory aspect. The court noted that the object of introducing Section 138 was to enhance the acceptability of cheques in the settlement of liabilities and to facilitate smooth business transactions. The court referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in Kanchan Mehta, which allowed for the closure of proceedings and discharge of the accused if the cheque amount with assessed costs and interest was paid.The court found no justification for remitting the matter to the trial court when it could be resolved by the High Court itself, especially since the petitioners had filed the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. asking the court to exercise its inherent power. The court concluded that the proceedings pending before the trial court under various R.T. Nos. should be quashed, subject to the petitioners depositing Rs. 15,00,000 towards compensation in addition to the cheque amount of Rs. 2,87,23,562 before the trial court within one month. The petitioners were also ordered to pay costs of Rs. 5,00,000 to the respondent.Conclusion:The petitions filed by the petitioners were allowed, and the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal, were quashed, subject to the conditions specified by the court.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found