I agree with Mr. A. Prakash.
It is often a very frustrating experience to file a suit under Section 138 of the NI Act for recovering the amount of a bounced cheque. The absence of the defendant/s, repeated adjournments sought by the advocates, non-service of summons, and also the warrants (defendants change the address and warrants could not be served) are the main reasons. Sometimes the local police are also parties in such cases of non-serviceability of the summons or warrants.
A better method is to take an acknowledgment of debt (balance confirmation letter) from the party who owes you money and file what is called a "summary suit" in the civil court, under which the recovery of principal is perhaps faster.
From India, Pune
53It is often a very frustrating experience to file a suit under Section 138 of the NI Act for recovering the amount of a bounced cheque. The absence of the defendant/s, repeated adjournments sought by the advocates, non-service of summons, and also the warrants (defendants change the address and warrants could not be served) are the main reasons. Sometimes the local police are also parties in such cases of non-serviceability of the summons or warrants.
A better method is to take an acknowledgment of debt (balance confirmation letter) from the party who owes you money and file what is called a "summary suit" in the civil court, under which the recovery of principal is perhaps faster.
From India, Pune
Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
