Unit 4 of Law of Banking and Negotiable Instruments (syllabus: Module IV — the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881: instruments and parties, holder and holder in due course, negotiation and endorsement, crossing, and dishonour of cheques under s. 138 with ss. 143A and 148; and recovery of debts through the Debt Recovery Tribunals). Below: what the unit covers, the provisions it turns on, and the cases an examiner expects you to name.
What this unit covers
- When is an instrument a negotiable instrument, and when is it not?
- Must a promissory note name the payee?
- What is the status of a post-dated cheque before the date it bears?
- Who is the holder of a promissory note, and who may give a valid discharge?
- When is a transferee a holder in due course, and what does it give him?
- What is a material alteration, and what writing forms part of the instrument?
- How is a crossed cheque to be paid, and who is protected?
- What are the ingredients of the offence under section 138, and the three periods?
- Does the presumption in section 139 extend to a legally enforceable debt, and how is it rebutted?
- Is a prosecution permissible on a second or successive dishonour?
- Why is section 143A prospective while section 148 is retrospective?
Treat that list as a self-test: recite each topic's rule from memory before you open its cases.
Provisions
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 13
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 4
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 6
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 8
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 9
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 87
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 126
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 138
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 139
- Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, s. 143A
Leading cases
- Lachmi Chand v. Madanlal Khemka
- Ponnuswami Chettiar v. P. Vellaimuthu Chettiar
- Ashok Yeshwant Badeve v. Surendra Madhavrao Nighojakar
- Nunna Gopalan v. Vuppuluri Lakshminarasamma
- Shivalingappa v. P. B. Puttappa
- Sections 123 to 131A of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 are the governing provisions; this course states no decided case on crossing
- Rangappa v. Sri Mohan
- MSR Leathers v. S. Palaniappan
- G. J. Raja v. Tejraj Surana
Full case summaries
- Ponnuswami Chettiar v. P. Vellaimuthu Chettiar (1957)
- Ashok Yeshwant Badeve v. Surendra Madhavrao Nighojakar (2001)
- Lachmi Chand v. Madanlal Khemka (1947)
- Nunna Gopalan v. Vuppuluri Lakshminarasamma (1940)
- Shivalingappa v. P. B. Puttappa (1971)
- C. C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed (2007)
- Rangappa v. Sri Mohan (2010)
- Laxmi Dyechem v. State of Gujarat (2012)
- MSR Leathers v. S. Palaniappan (2012)
- G. J. Raja v. Tejraj Surana (2019) and Surinder Singh Deswal v. Virender Gandhi (2019)
Exam questions on this unit
- Banking and NI exam question: Distinguish a holder from a holder…
- Banking and NI exam question: State the ingredients of the offence…
- Banking and NI exam question: Discuss the presumption under section…
- Banking and NI exam question: Explain the object of crossing a…
- Banking and NI exam question: Describe the constitution, jurisdiction…