REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

KUMARAN Appellant

V/S

STATE OF KERALA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

EAST END DWELLING CO. LTD. V. FINSBURY BOROUGH COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
KIRPA RAM V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF BROACH AND PANCHMAHALS V. OCHHAVLAL BHIKALAL [REFERRED TO]
DIGAMBER KASHINATH BHAVARTHI V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
K. VEMMANA SHENOY V. COLLECTOR OF SOUTH KANARA [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH H JAIN VS. MARIE FERNANDES [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
VIJAYAN VS. SADANANDAN K [REFERRED TO]
R MOHAN VS. A K VIJAYA KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
PARAS NATH VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. KRISHNA PILLAI AND MADHAVAN PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
K S SAJI KUMAR VS. K SOMAN PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
BRAHAMESHWAR PRASAD SINHA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The present appeals raise an interesting question as to whether when compensation is ordered as payable for an offence committed under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and in default thereof, a jail sentence is prescribed and undergone, is compensation still recoverable.

(3.) In the present case, the facts are that the complainant approached the Magistrate under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a transaction where the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs. 2.75 lakh from the complainant. When the complainant demanded the amount, the accused issued a cheque for the said amount which was returned as dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds. The requisite demand notice was sent by the complainant to the accused followed by the complaint. Ultimately, the accused was found guilty of the offence under Sec. 138, and was convicted, stating:

Click here to view full judgment.

KUMARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address