In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court overturned a High Court judgment that permitted a complainant in a cheque dishonour case to alter the date of the cheque stated in the complaint.
The apex court emphasized that the application for the amendment came after the conclusion of the evidence stage. Initially, the date of the cheque was documented as 22.07.2010 in both the complaint and the subsequent legal notice issued after the dishonour. This date remained consistent throughout the evidence presented.
However, post-evidence stage, the complainant sought to revise the cheque date in the complaint to 22.07.2012 instead of the original 22.07.2010. The amendment also aimed to modify the date of the cheque mentioned in the evidence. Despite the trial court’s rejection, the High Court permitted the change, citing the possibility of typographical errors.
The Supreme Court disapproved of the High Court’s decision, highlighting that the legal notice preceding the complaint also bore the date 22.07.2010.
“In a case of this nature, where the date holds significance in determining the adequacy of notice within the stipulated time frame under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and the availability of funds in the issuer’s account on that date, the sought-after amendment was unwarranted,” stated the bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Sanjay Kumar.
The case, Munish Kumar Gupta v. M/s Mittal Trading Company, underscores the importance of maintaining consistency in legal documents and evidentiary records in cheque dishonour cases.
