SC: Forfeiture of Earnest Money Impermissible When Both Buyer and Seller are at Fault  ||  Supreme Court: Gravity of Offence Cannot Defeat Speedy Trial; Pre-Trial Detention is Punishment  ||  SC: Terrorist Act under UAPA Includes Conspiracies to Disrupt Essential Supplies, Not Just Violence  ||  Supreme Court Directs Measures to Prevent False and Frivolous Complaints Against Judicial Officers  ||  SC: Mere Participation in Arbitration Doesn’t Bar Challenging Arbitrator; Waiver Must be in Writing  ||  SC: Under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, the Plaintiff, as Dominus Litis, Cannot be Forced to Add a Defendant  ||  SC: Law Does Not Change With a New Bench; Decisions of a Coordinate Bench are Binding  ||  Delhi HC Absence of Formal Arrest under Section 311A Crpc Does Not Bar Giving Handwriting Samples  ||  Del HC: Security Guards Performing Duties Cannot Be Prosecuted For Wrongful Restraint or Molestation  ||  Bombay HC: Housing Society Earning From Telecom Towers Isn’t An ‘Industry’; Staff Get No Gratuity    

Meghalaya HC: Dishonored Cheque Must Have Been Issued by Account Holder U/S.138 NI Act - (18 May 2022)

BANKING

Meghalaya High Court has reiterated that the dishonoured cheque must have been issued by the account holder under his name and signature for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to be made out.

Tags : MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT   DISHONOURED CHEQUE   SECTION 138   NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT   1881  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved