Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Negotiable instruments act, 1881

SRI SUJIES BENEFIT FUNDS LIMITED versus M. JAGANATHUAN

The Supreme Court restored the Trial Court's conviction and sentence, holding that a cheque issued for discharge of loan and returned with endorsement 'Account Closed' attracts liability under Section 138 N.I. Act; discrepancies in stated rates of interest (1.8% v. 3% per month) were insufficient to displace the appellant's claim, and the Appellate Court and High Court erred in acquitting the respondent on that basis; the respondent was held liable to pay one and a half times the cheque amount (Rs.28,50,000) and imprisonment was waived subject to payment within eight months.

  • Section 138 n.i. act
  • Dishonour of cheque 'account closed'
  • Interest rate dispute
  • Tamil nadu prohibition of charging exorbitant interest act, 2003
  • Additional evidence under section 391 crpc
Read case analysis
Consumer law

SHRIRAM CHITS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED EARLIER KNOWN AS SHRIRAM CHITS (K) PVT. LTD versus RAGHACHAND ASSOCIATES

The appeal is dismissed because the service provider failed to discharge the onus of proving that the services were availed for a commercial purpose on the preponderance of probabilities; absent such proof the complaint was maintainable and the orders of the consumer fora granting refund and interest stand upheld.

  • Maintainability of complaint
  • Definition of consumer (section 2(7))
  • Commercial purpose (exclusion)
  • Onus of proof
  • Standard of proof: preponderance of probabilities
  • Framing of issues in consumer forums
Read case analysis
Contract law

K.P. SUBBARAMA SASTRI & ORS. ETC. versus K.S. RAGHAVAN & ORS. ETC.

The stipulation for lump sum payment with 12% interest upon default by a prized subscriber is not unconscionable or penal, as the debtor becomes liable for the full amount upon prize, and the instalment facility is a concession that may be withdrawn on default; such contract terms are valid and enforceable.

  • Penalty clauses in contracts
  • Chitty/kuri prize subscriber default
  • Interpretation of kerala chitties act provisions
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.