firm k.k. katariya vs PREM KUMR — 87/2019

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--Convicted and Sentenced on 27th March 2026.

Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR

CNR: RJSG180001592019

Case disposed

Filing Number

159/2019

Filing Date

13-02-2019

Registration No

87/2019

Registration Date

13-02-2019

Court

ACJM SADULSAHAR TALUKA

Judge

1-ACJM

Decision Date

27th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Convicted and Sentenced

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138

Petitioner(s)

firm k.k. katariya

Adv. Laxmi Narayan Sehgal

Respondent(s)

PREM KUMR

Hearing History

Judge: 1-ACJM

27-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

Final arguments

25-02-2026

Final arguments

18-02-2026

Final arguments

31-01-2026

Final arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

27-03-2026
Judgement

Case Summary: Firm K.K. Katariya v. Prem Kumar (Case 87/2019) The court convicted the defendant Prem Kumar under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a cheque (No. 980244 dated 29.08.2017 for ₹1,35,000) that was dishonored due to insufficient funds. The court found that despite receiving a legal notice and being informed of the dishonor, the defendant failed to make payment, constituting a criminal offense. The defendant was sentenced to one year simple imprisonment and ordered to pay compensation of ₹1,85,000 to the complainant firm. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Firm K.K. Katariya v. Prem Kumar (Case 87/2019) The court convicted the defendant Prem Kumar under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a cheque (No. 980244 dated 29.08.2017 for ₹1,35,000) that was dishonored due to insufficient funds. The court found that despite receiving a legal notice and being informed of the dishonor, the defendant failed to make payment, constituting a criminal offense. The defendant was sentenced to one year simple imprisonment and ordered to pay compensation of ₹1,85,000 to the complainant firm. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

ACJM SADULSAHAR TALUKA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case