Case Title- Samiullah v. The State of Bihar & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1292)  The two-Judge Bench comprising Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Joymalya Bagchi explained, ,registration of a document recording purchase of immovable property does not confer guaranteed title of ownership, instead it only serves as a public record of the transaction having presumptive evidentiary value,...Read More

Sections 138, 139, 118, 140—Dishonour of cheque—Insufficiency of funds—Appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act after a Cheque issued byRead More

The Registrar General, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, for The State of Telangana and for the State of Andhra PradeshRead More

In the above mentioned  case, the High Court had compounded the offence, even though the appellants/ complainant had not consented, by invoking its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Distinguishing these two sections, the Bench of Justices CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol observedRead More

The Hon’ble  Supreme Court of India held that an authorized signatory of the company could not be considered as a 'drawer' of cheque, and therefore, could not be directed to pay the interim compensation to the complainant under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881 (“NI Act”).Read More