TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1151
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petitions filed on behalf of petitioners against the respondents as the petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 09.03.2022 (Annexure P-5) passed in respective complaints on an application moved by the petitioners for seeking permission to compare the writing over the cheque having been used in a different ink than the ink in which the signatures had been appended. Details of each case are given as under:- Case Complaint No. Cheque No. Amount CRM-M-14036- 2022 198 dated 19.09.2016 507472 dated 15.06.2016 Rs. 3,96,504/- CRM-14050-2022 136 dated 20.10.2016 507485 dated 15.06.2016 & 507486 dated 15.07.2016 Rs. 7,00,000/- & Rs. 6,29,511/- CRM-14072-2022 189 dated 02.09.2016 507434 dated 15.06.2015 & 507435 date....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reof, the instant batch of petitions has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the blank signed cheques of the petitioners have been misused by the respondent-complainant by filling in denomination in the body of the cheque in his own writing and at the hands of his own agents and that the same being a fraudulent transaction, it is essential and integral for the petitioners to establish their innocence and that a handwriting expert be examined to prove the said stand. He further argued that denial of such an opportunity to the petitioners shall occasion failure of justice and shall deny an opportunity of fair trial to the petitioners. 4. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ete a negotiable instrument for any amount specified therein. It is thus evident from a perusal of Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 that an instrument, signature whereupon is not denied, does not become void merely because of the same having been filled-up by a different ink or different handwriting. 8. The same would now lead to the next question as to whether the case of the petitioners shall be severely prejudiced on account of failure on the part of the petitioners to lead evidence of a handwriting expert. 9. The defence set up by the petitioners is that he had not filled in the cheque, however, assuming it to be so, the same would not in any manner impact the case projected by the complainant. It is evident from a p....