Q: Discuss the citation of Josco Agencies V. K. P. Shukkoor ?

Ans: Josco Agencies v. K.P. Shukkoor

Kerala High Court
Jul 25, 2017

The complainant can avail of  the advantage of the presumption under Sections 118 and 113 of the Negotiable Instruments Act only when the complainant has proved the significant facts for availing such a presumption. What the complainant has to prove in a proceeding under Section 138 NI Act is not just a liability. It must be a legally enforcible liability. The complainant does not know when goods were purchased by the accused, what goods were purchased by the him, for what amount goods were purchased by the accused, and he does not know anything about the cheque in question. Thus, the evidence given by complainant is valueless.
The Kerela High Court held that the judgment of conviction made by the trial court was appropriately reversed by the appellate court, and that the accused was rightly found not guilty by the appellate court.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Q: What is the significance of issuing account payee cheque?

Ans: While issuing the cheque, a drawer should draw two parallel lines on its left side and should write 'account only' in between them. By doing this, the cheque becomes an account payee cheque and the payment will be made only in the bank account of the payee. In case of any type of fraud, the payee can be traced. Having the above- mentioned precautions, a drawer can be avoided from fraud to a great extent.
Read more

Q: Elaborate the citation of Sasseriyil Joseph vs Devassia on 22 September, 2000 ?

Ans:  Sasseriyil Joseph vs Devassia on 22 September, 2000. The Kerela High Court held that Section 138 of negotiable instrument act is attracted only if there is legally recoverable debt and it can not be said that the time barred debt is legally enforceable debt. For the reasons stated above, the Kerela High Court finds no reason to interfere with the order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.  The Kerela High Court sees no infirmity in the judgment of the lower Court. This appeal is groundless and is liable to be dismissed.
Read more

Q: How would section 208, 209 and 210 of IPC be implemented in dishonour of cheque ?

Ans: A and B collude together and A issues the cheque for X Amount, which gets dishonored.  B files the complaint under S.138, and without proving the liability gets the benefit of presumption under S.139, now both A and B enact the drama of compounding under S.147 of NI Act, matter closed, but in principle A has violated IPC S.208 and S.210 and B has violated IPC S.209. So, if rightly B is asked to prove the entitlement to become the holder, before presumption can be granted to him, surely he would fail and lawfully both A and B can be prosecuted under IPC S.208, S.209 and S.210 if required.
Read more