Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Applicability and interpretation of the Bengal Money Lenders Act, 1940 in relation to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, regarding the dishonor of cheques in money lending or investment transactions. It examines whether a legally enforceable debt or investment of money into a business exists, and whether there are sufficient ingredients for an offense u/s 138. The court held that a loan advanced by an unlicensed money lender is not a debt or liability u/s 138. However, the Bengal Money Lenders Act and the Negotiable Instruments Act operate independently, and provisions of the former do not bar civil remedies or prosecution u/s 138. If mandatory requirements of Section 138 are satisfied, a complaint can be filed even without a money lending license. The court dismissed the revision application, finding no merit in the arguments against initiating or continuing proceedings u/s 138.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.