The case involves a petition to quash proceedings initiated against the petitioners under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complaint alleges that the petitioners, directors of a private limited company, borrowed Rs. 27,00,000/- from the complainant in February 2016. When the complainant insisted on repayment in February 2018, the petitioners issued three cheques dated 19.04.2018, each for Rs. 9 lakhs. These cheques were returned unpaid on 20.04.2018 due to insufficient funds. The petitioners argue that the company is under Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) since 13.06.2017, when the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) passed a moratorium order. They contend that Section 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, suspends the
…In February 2016, Accused No. 1, a private limited company, through its directors (Accused No. 2 and 3), borrowed Rs. 27,00,000/- from the complainant, S. Thangavel. Accused No. 2 is the Managing Director, and Accused No. 3 is a Director. In February 2018, upon the complainant's insistence, the accused issued three cheques dated 19.04.2018, each for Rs. 9 lakhs, drawn on State Bank of India, Tiruchengode Branch. When presented for collection on 19.04.2018, the cheques were returned unpaid on 20.04.2018, marked "Funds Insufficient." The complainant issued a statutory notice on 17.05.2018, and subsequently filed a complaint. The petitioners (Accused No. 2 and 3) sought to quash the proceedings, arguing that the company is under Corporate Insolvency Resolution
…Sign in to view the parties.
Accused No.1 b…
The complainant…
The case involves a petition to quash proceedings initiated against the petitioners under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complaint alleges that the petitioners, directors of a private limited company, borrowed Rs. 27,00,000/- from the complainant in February 2016. When the complainant insisted on repayment in February 2018, the petitioners issued three cheques dated 19.04.2018, each for Rs. 9 lakhs. These cheques were returned unpaid on 20.04.2018 due to insufficient funds. The petitioners argue that the company is under Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) since 13.06.2017, when the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) passed a moratorium order. They contend that Section 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, suspends the
…In February 2016, Accused No. 1, a private limited company, through its directors (Accused No. 2 and 3), borrowed Rs. 27,00,000/- from the complainant, S. Thangavel. Accused No. 2 is the Managing Director, and Accused No. 3 is a Director. In February 2018, upon the complainant's insistence, the accused issued three cheques dated 19.04.2018, each for Rs. 9 lakhs, drawn on State Bank of India, Tiruchengode Branch. When presented for collection on 19.04.2018, the cheques were returned unpaid on 20.04.2018, marked "Funds Insufficient." The complainant issued a statutory notice on 17.05.2018, and subsequently filed a complaint. The petitioners (Accused No. 2 and 3) sought to quash the proceedings, arguing that the company is under Corporate Insolvency Resolution
…Accused No.1 b…
The complainant…