Case Details

Citation(s)
2024 SLG 5799 2024 SLD 5799 = 2024 CLC 1643
Lahore High Court
R.F.A. No.11759 of 2021, heard on 16th May, 2024.
Before Shahid Bilal Hassan, J
Chaudhry Mohsin Iftikhar Gujjar for Appellant. Mehboob Rasool Awan and Imran A. Mian for
Respondent.

MUHAMMAD AFZAL---Appellant

VERSUS

BINYAMEEN SAJID---Respondent

Law: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Section: XXVI,56

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: XXXVII,1,2,VII,10

Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)-------S.56---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXVII Rr.1, 2 & O.VII, R.10--Recovery suit on the basis of negotiable instrument---Part performance---Payments received by the appellant in pursuance of different cheques issued from the same cheque books---Non-adoption of procedure of endorsement on the cheque before presenting it---Effect---Section 56 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('Act, 1881'), specifically provides for an endorsement on a negotiable instrument with regards to part-payment and thereafter the instrument could be negotiated for the balance amount---If the drawer and the payee of the cheque adopt the procedure given in S.56 of the Act 1881, then it would be open to the payee of the cheque to present the cheque for payment of only the endorsed balance amount, due to him--Without adopting the procedure as provided in S.56 ibid, the cheque could not be presented for encashment and suit under O.XXXVII, Rr.1 & 2 of C.P.C. could not be filed, rather a suit for recovery of balance amount of cheque before a court of plenary jurisdiction has to be instituted---After receipt of part payment, appellant did not adopt the procedure as provided under S.56 of the Act, 1881, therefore, he was barred from presenting the cheque in question in the bank for its encashment and instituting suit under O.XXXVII, Rr.1 & 2 of C.P.C.---Proper forum in this regard was Court of plenary jurisdiction i.e. Civil Court for getting his grievance redressed---Trial Court should have returned the plaint under O.VII, R.10, C.P.C. for its presentation before the court of competent jurisdiction, obviously, keeping in view barricade of limitation---Appeal was allowed accordingly.Date of hearing: 16th May, 2024.JUDGMENTSHAHID BILAL HASSAN, J.---Tersely, the appellant instituted a suit under Order XXXVII, Rules 1 and 2, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for recovery of Rs.11,800,000/- against the present respondent on the basis of cheque No.3685676 pertaining to A/C No.0061583724121, KASB Bank to be encashed on 21.09.2016, which was duly contested by the present respondent after seeking leave to appear and defend the suit.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register