INDRA KUMAR PATODIA & ANR. versus RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ORS.

INDRA KUMAR PATODIA & ANR. versus RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ORS.

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, does not require a signature so long as it is verified by the complainant; the relevant date for limitation is the date of filing the complaint, not the date of cognizance.

Parties
Appellant: Indra Kumar Patodia; Appellant: Mahendra Kumar Patodia; Respondent: Reliance Industries Ltd.; Respondent: Respondent No.2; Respondent: Respondent No.3
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Disposition on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Negotiable Instruments—dishonour of Cheque, Procedure—validity of Unsigned Complaint, Limitation in Criminal Complaints

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Indra Kumar Patodia

Appellant

Mahendra Kumar Patodia

Appellant

Reliance Industries Ltd.

Respondent

Respondent No.2

Respondent

Respondent No.3

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Disposition on Appeal From High Court

  1. 1 Is a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, maintainable without signature when verified and process issued?
  2. 2 What is the relevant date for calculating limitation in such complaints?

Ratio Decidendi

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, does not require a signature so long as it is verified by the complainant; the relevant date for limitation is the date of filing the complaint, not the date of cognizance.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, without signature, is maintainable if verified and process issued by Magistrate.
  • Date of filing complaint is relevant for limitation, not date of cognizance.