Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

221 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 201–221.

KISHAN RAOversusSHANKARGOUDA

2018 INSC 5612 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant had given the accused a loan of Rs.2,00,000 and the accused issued a post‑dated cheque to repay it, which was later returned for insufficient funds. The trial court, applying the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, convicted the accused under Section 138, a decision affirmed b

PREM RAJversusPOONAMMA MENON & ANR.

2024 INSC 2602 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant borrowed Rs.2,00,000 from the complainant and issued a cheque which was later dishonoured for insufficient funds. The complainant filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, while the appellant simultaneously filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that the same cheque

STATE BANK OF HYDERABADversusRABO BANK

2015 INSC 7241 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, RABO Bank, sued State Bank of Hyderabad (SBH) in a summary suit under Order 37 of the CPC, claiming payment on several Bills of Exchange that SBH had allegedly accepted via telex/fax messages. SBH denied liability, asserting that the co‑acceptances were unauthorized, that the Bills lacked proper signatur

NITINBHAI SAEVATILAL SHAH & ANOTHERversusMANUBHAI MANJIBHAI PANCHAL & ANOTHER

2011 INSC 6311 September 2011Disposed off

The appellants were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a summary trial before a Metropolitan Magistrate. After the magistrate recorded the substance of evidence, he was transferred and his successor proceeded with the trial relying on the recorded evidence, convicting the appellants. The a

NATIONAL HOUSING BANKversusBHERUDAN DUGAR HOUSING FINANCE LTD. & ORS. ETC.

2024 INSC 5661 August 2024Case Partly allowed

The National Housing Bank filed a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC alleging that Bherudan Dugar Housing Finance Ltd., its Managing Director, and five directors violated Section 29A(i) read with Section 50 of the National Housing Bank Act, 1987, an offence punishable under Section 49(2A). The High Court quashed

SUNITA PALITA & OTHERSversusM/S PANCHAMI STONE QUARRY

2022 INSC 7751 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, who were independent, non‑executive directors of MBL Infrastructure Ltd., were impleaded as accused in a complaint under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the dishonour of an account‑payee cheque signed by the company’s managing director. They filed a criminal revision under Se

DASHRATH RUPSINGH RATHODversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2014 INSC 5141 August 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the proper territorial jurisdiction for criminal complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It held that the offence is completed when a cheque is dishonoured by the drawee bank, and therefore the court having jurisdiction over the place where the cheque is dishonou

NISHANT AGGARWALversusKAILASH KUMAR SHARMA

2013 INSC 3821 July 2013Dismissed

The complainant, a resident of Bhiwani, presented a cheque drawn by the appellant on a Guwahati bank, which was stopped and returned unpaid. After sending a legal notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant filed a complaint in the Judicial Magistrate Court at Bhiwani, which initially he

MRS. APARNA A. SHAHversusM/S. SHETH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2013 INSC 3981 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mrs. Aparna A. Shah, challenged criminal proceedings initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a cheque dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The cheque was issued by her husband from a joint account and was signed only by him. The Supreme Court examined whether a joint account h

M/S FROST INTERNATIONAL LIMITEDversusM/S MILAN DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS (P) LIMITED & ANR.

2022 INSC 3801 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, a mining company, sued the defendant for a declaration that a Rs 56‑lakh cheque, given as security under a memorandum of understanding, was not payable because the defendant failed to protect the plaintiff’s port licence. The defendant filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of

M/S ARIF AZIM CO. LTD.versusM/S APTECH LTD.

2024 INSC 1551 March 2024Case Allowed

The petitioners, an Afghan franchisee, sought appointment of a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to resolve disputes over royalty payments and renewal of franchise agreements with the respondent. The key issues were whether the Limitation Act, 1963 applied to a Section 11

M/S. BLS INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITEDversusM/S. RAJWANT SINGH & OTHERS

2023 INSC 1871 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, BLS Infrastructure Ltd., filed eight complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondents. The complainant’s statement and cross‑examination were recorded, and the trial court closed the complainant’s evidence, directing the case to proceed to defence evidence and an app

P. MOHANRAJ & ORS.versusM/S. SHAH BROTHERS ISPAT PVT. LTD.

2021 INSC 1331 March 2021Disposed off

The appellant company failed to honour multiple cheques, leading the respondent to issue statutory notices under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and file criminal complaints. While the corporate debtor was placed under a moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), the

N PARAMESWARAN UNNIversusG KANNAN AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 1941 March 2017Disposed off

The appellant, N. Parameswaran Unni, presented two cheques drawn by the first respondent, G. Kannan, which were returned unpaid and received a bank intimation on 8 April 1991. He issued a statutory notice by registered post on 12 April 1991, which was returned marked "addressee absent," and a second notice on 4 May 199

B V SESHAIAHversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR

2023 INSC 931 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act after a private complaint by Respondent No.2. While a revision petition was pending, the parties executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) providing for amicable settlement or arbitration, and obligating Respondent No.2 to file a compr

JIK INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ORS.versusAMARLAL V. JUMANI AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 601 February 2012Dismissed

The appellants sought to have criminal complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, read with Section 141, dismissed on the ground that a scheme of compromise approved under Section 391 of the Companies Act had automatically compounded the offences. The Supreme Court examined whether the sanction of

KOLLA VEERA RAGHAV RAOversusGORANTALA VENKATESWARA RAO AND ANR.

2011 INSC 881 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kolla Veera Raghav Rao, had been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. He was later prosecuted under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code for the same set of facts. The central issue was whether Section 300(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, which bars a person from b

DALJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 211 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Daljit Singh, was declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. for failing to appear after summons in a cheque‑related criminal case filed in 2010. He was later acquitted of the underlying offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and an FIR under Section 174A IPC was filed for his

M/S NARESH POTTERIESversusM/S AARTI INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 11 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Naresh Potteries (appellant) filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against M/s Aarti Industries (respondent No.1) for the dishonour of a cheque issued in the appellant's favour. The complaint was filed by the manager, Neeraj Kumar, who held a power of attorney from the sole proprieto

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search