Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

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
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1990 (10) TMI 386

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1. The petitioner was the complainant and respondents Nos. 2 to 4 were accused in P. C. R. No. 88 of 1989 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, IV Court, Bangalore City (for short "the Magistrate"). It arose out of a private complaint presented by the petitioner complainant under Section 200, Criminal Procedure Code, alleging that respondents Nos. 2 to 4 are liable to be punished u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y of the complaint, the learned Magistrate, by his order dated November 15, 1989, came to the conclusion that dishonouring of a cheque on the ground of "closure of his account" by the drawer of the cheque does not constitute an offence under Section 138 of the Act as the said Section contemplates dishonouring of a cheque either for want of funds or for exceeding the arrangements made. In....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o objection to granting two weeks' time. Therefore, the case is adjourned by two weeks. But, none appeared for the petitioner-complainant on September 21, 1990, again on October 8, 1990, and again on October 11, 1990, and today also. Therefore, Sri S. M. Hegde, learned counsel for respondents Nos. 2 to 4 accused is beard. 5. As rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the accused, Section 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ccused on a recent Division Bench decision of this court in Telecom Employees Co-operative Housing Society Ltd, v. Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes Minority Communities and Backward Classes Improvement Centre ILR1990KAR3320 , in which a Division Bench of this court presided over by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice has observed at page 3388 as under : " (1) The court will not extend the l....