https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367262 A summary suit based on a memorandum of understanding and dishonoured cheques was upheld because the repayment obligation was expressly recorded, including a fixed repayment period and minimum guaranteed return. The Court treated the label of the transaction as investment or loan as immaterial, since the duty to repay was clear and part-payments reinforced liability. It also held that the suit was maintainable on the dishonoured cheques, including cheques issued as security but intended to be honoured on presentation. Pending complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act did not justify leave to defend, as civil recovery and criminal proceedings were distinct; rejection of leave to defend and the decree for the balance amount were affirmed. en-us Fri, 31 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Sep 2018 08:01:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367262 A summary suit based on a memorandum of understanding and dishonoured cheques was upheld because the repayment obligation was expressly recorded, including a fixed repayment period and minimum guaranteed return. The Court treated the label of the transaction as investment or loan as immaterial, since the duty to repay was clear and part-payments reinforced liability. It also held that the suit was maintainable on the dishonoured cheques, including cheques issued as security but intended to be honoured on presentation. Pending complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act did not justify leave to defend, as civil recovery and criminal proceedings were distinct; rejection of leave to defend and the decree for the balance amount were affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 31 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367262