TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 663
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to repay the said loan, within a period of three months with interest at the rate of 1%. On 11.08.2013, the respondent lend loan to the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 3 lakhs and towards repayment of the same, on 11.11.2013, the petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.635789 drawn on Axis Bank, Ashok Nagar, Chennai. On instructions, the respondent, on 11.11.2013, deposited the said cheque for collection and it was returned dishonoured for the reason that insufficient funds. Therefore, the respondent issued statutory notice on 10.12.2013 and after receipt of the same, the petitioner neither paid the cheque amount nor issue reply notice to the respondent. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would raise t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cheque and the account belongs to whom. The petitioner issued her husband's cheque and also signed by him belongs to the current account of proprietorship concern CANNAN CITY. Deliberately, with dishonest intention to cheat the respondent, the cheque has been issued. Therefore, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act is very much attracted as against the petitioner and as such, he sought for dismissal of the quash petition. 5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 6.Admittedly, the cheque has been issued from the current account of CANNAN CITY signed by one P.David Rajan as its Proprietor/authorised signatory. The petitioner/accused is no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be said that the complainant has no remedy against the appellant but certainly not under Section 138. The culpability attached to dishonour of a cheque can, in no case "except in case of Section 141 of the N.I. Act" be extended to those on whose behalf the cheque is issued. This Court reiterates that it is only the drawer of the cheque who can be made an accused in any proceeding under Section 138 of the Act. Even the High Court has specifically recorded the stand of the appellant that she was not the signatory of the cheque but rejected the contention that the amount was not due and payable by her solely on the ground that the trial is in progress. It is to be noted that only after issuance of process, a person can approach the High Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unt of the cheque, or with both: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless- (a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier; (b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and (c) the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the payee or as the case may be, to the....