In which judgment, under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that though compounding requires consent of both the parties, but even in absence of such consent, the Court can, in the interest of justice, on being satisfied that the complainant has been duly compensated, in its discretion, close the proceedings and discharge the accused:
A. Madhya Pradesh State Legal Service Authority v. Prateek Jain, 2015 (1) SCC (Cri) 211
B. Meters and Instruments Private Limited v. Kanchan Mehta, AIR 2017 SC 4594
C. JIK Industries Ltd. v. Amarlal V. Jumani & Anr., AIR 2012 SC 1079
D. Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayyed Bala Lal H., AIR 2010 SC 1907
Answer: Option B
This Question Belongs to Law >> Negotiable Instruments Act
The term 'legal representative' in section 29 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
A. Does not include executors or administrator (Rama v. Praoin, AIR 1926 Mad 389)
B. Includes executors or administrator (K. Subbanna v. K. Subbarayudu, AIR 1926 Mad 390)
C. Includes executors but does not include administrators (P. Nayar v. T. Ramanna, AIR 1929 Mad 389)
D. Includes only administrators but does not include executors (P. K. Pati v. Damodar Sahu, AIR 1953 Ori 179)
In the case of a promissory note which is not negotiable
A. Notice of dishonour is compulsory
B. No notice of dishonour is necessary
C. Negotiable Instruments Act is silent on this aspect
D. Indorsement is necessary
The endorsement of a negotiable instrument is followed by delivery
A. Yes
B. No
C. Both (A) and (B)
D. None of the above
'Truncated Cheque' is dealt within which section of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881?
A. Section 5
B. Section 6
C. Section 7
D. Section 8
Join The Discussion