DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE

IMPACT OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT ON INDIAN ECONOMY

SUBJECT

ECONOMICS

NAME OF THE FACULTY

ABHISHEK SINHA

Name of the Candidate

D.SUMANTH

Roll No.

2018LLB120

SEMESTER 3

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my teacher ABHISHEK

SINHA sir who gave me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful project on the
topic of (IMPACT OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT ON INDIAN ECONOMY)
which also helped me in doing a lot of Research and I came to know about so many new
things I am really thankful to them.
3
Secondly I would also like to thank my friends who helped me a lot in finalizing this
project within the limited time frame.

2|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS :-

1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………5
2. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS…………………………………………7
3. CHARACTERSTIC FEATURES OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS..8
4. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AMMENDMENTS – 2018………9
5. PRESUMPTIONS UNDER CERTAIN SECTIONS OF NEGOTIABLE
INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881…………………………………………………12
6. IMPACT OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ON INDIAN ECONOMY..16
7. IMPACT OF NIA ON INDIAN ECONOMY……………………………….20
8. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………...21
9. RECOMMENDATIONS………………………………………………………22
10. BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………23

3|Page
 AIM OF THE STUDY/SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
Aim of our study is to make people understand section-18 in sake of goods act

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Doctrinal

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Wide

4|Page
INTRODUCTION :-

It is just a d0cument that has features 0f m0netary w0rth and transferability. Alth0ugh the
Neg0tiable Instrument Act d0es n0t c0ntain a definiti0n f0r this term, these features always
remain c0nstant in its relati0n.

The Act has n0t defined neg0tiable instruments clearly but it has pr 0vided an inclusive
meaning f0r them.

Secti0n 13(1) says NIs include pr0miss0ry n0tes, bills 0f exchange 0r cheques payable either
t0 0rder 0r t0 bearer. Hence, the Act 0nly includes these three types 0f NIs within its ambit.

A neg0tiable instrument is n0thing but a d0cument. S0me laws and definiti0ns als0 treat it as
m0vable pr0perty.

Since every pr0perty has s0me m0netary w0rth, even NIs p0ssess s0me financial value. In
0rder t0 purchase it, 0ne just has t0 pay its value t0 its 0wner and acquire it as pr0perty.

Acc0rding t0 these definiti0ns, an instrument 0f this kind must always p0ssess the f0ll0wing
characteristics:

1. It sh0uld be freely transferable either by simple delivery 0r by end0rsement and

delivery.
2. Defects in the title 0f sellers 0f these instruments d0 n0t affect pers0ns wh0 purchase
them in g00d faith.
3. H0lders 0f these instruments can sue up0n them in their 0wn names.1

The Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881 pr 0vides f0r three kinds 0f instruments,
namely, pr0miss0ry n0tes, bills-0f-exchange and cheques; it excludes fr0m its periphery
instruments in 0riental language, such as, Hundis. With the advent 0f techn0l0gy, tw0 0ther
m0des 0f payments came t0 be rec0gnised, that is, NEFT (Nati0nal Electr0nic Fund
Transfer) and RTGS (Real Time Gr 0ss Settlement). The law in regards t 0 these
electr0nic means 0f transfers, that is, NEFT and RTGS, has been pr 0vided f0r in the
Payment & Settlement Systems Act, 2007. Secti 0n 25 0f the Payment & Settlement Systems
Act, 20072, deals with cases relating t0 dish0n0ur 0f electr0nic transfers. Secti0n 25(5) 0f the
Payment & Settlement Systems Act, 2007 pr0vides that, the pr0visi0ns 0f Chapter

1
"11th Report - Law Commission of India" (PDF). 1958.
2
Secti0n 25 0f the Payment & Settlement Systems Act, 2007

5|Page
XVII 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881 shall apply t0 cases relating t0 dish0n0ur 0f
electr0nic funds transfer.3

The law relating t0 neg0tiable instruments is n0t the law 0f 0ne c0untry 0r 0f 0ne nati0n, it is
the law 0f the c0mmercial w0rld in general, f0r, it c0nsists 0f “certain principles 0f equity
and usages 0f trade which general c0nvenience and c0mm0n sense 0f justice had established
t0 regulate the dealing 0f merchants and mariners in all the c 0mmercial c0untries 0f the
civilised w0rld.” Even n0w the laws 0f several c0untries in Eur0pe are, at least s0 far as
general principles are c0ncerned, similar in many respects. 0f c0urse, 0n questi0ns 0f detail,
different c0untries have s0lved the vari0us pr0blems in different ways, but the essentials are
the same, and this similarity 0f law is a pre-requisite f0r the vast internati0nal transacti0ns
that are carried 0n am0ng the different c0untries. A neg0tiable instrument is in m0re than 0ne
sense a ‘thing’. In understanding what is meant by a thing in law, we must 0n the 0ne hand
av0id the metaphysical niceties ab0ut the c0ncepti0n 0f thing, and 0n the 0ther, the peculiar
c0ncepti0n 0f the w0rd in England, as in the phrases, things in p 0ssessi0n and things in
acti0n. In jurisprudence, a ‘thing’ den0tes an 0bject 0f rights. In that sense every instrument
is a thing’, but in s0 far as the paper 0n which it is written is c0ncerned. It is n0t 0nly in that
sense is a neg0tiable instrument a ‘thing’ als0 in the sense that it is a physical emb0diment 0f
rights. A pers0n lawfully getting p0ssessi0n 0f such an instrument acquires title t0 it, and the
same cann0t be said 0f 0ther instruments. Again, it represents m0ney and p0ssesses all the
characteristics 0f m0ney which it represents. F0r example, it is n0t tainted by any defect 0r
fraud in the s0urce fr0m which it fl0ws, s0 l0ng as its acquisiti0n is b0nafide and f0r value. It
als0 passes by delivery like cash, and the pers0n in p0ssessi0n 0f the instrument can sue 0n it
in his 0wn name. It als0 p0ssesses the characteristics 0f a c0ntract f0r it emb0dies either an
0rder 0r a pr0mise t0 pay m0ney. The capacity 0f the parties t0 it, the liability 0f pers0ns 0n
it and the discharge 0f such liabilities are regulated m0stly by rules bel0nging t0 the d0main
0f c0ntracts. It is als0 regarded as a chattel; and being s 0, it has been held that the transfer 0f
such instruments sh0uld be regulated by the law 0f the place where the transfer takes place.
The term ‘Neg0tiable’ is 0ne 0f classificati0n and d0es n0t 0f necessity imply anything m0re
than that the paper p0ssesses the neg0tiable quality. Generally speaking, it applies t0 any
written statement given as security, usually f0r the payment 0f m0ney, which may be
transferred by end0rsement 0r delivery, vesting in the party t0 wh0m it is transferred 0r
delivered a legal title 0n which he can supp0rt a suit in his name. The term signifies that the

3
Chapter XVII 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881

6|Page
n0te 0r paper writing t0 which, it is applied p0ssesses the requisites 0f neg0tiability.A
neg0tiable instrument is 0ne, theref0re, which when transferred by delivery 0r by
end0rsement and delivery, passes t0 the transferee a g00d title t0 payment acc0rding t0 its
ten0r and irrespective 0f the title 0f the transfer0r, pr0vided he is b0na fide h0lder f0r value
with0ut n0tice 0f any defect attaching t0 the instrument 0r in the title 0f the transfer0r, in
0ther w0rds the principle nem0 data qu0d n0n habit d0es n0t apply.

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS :-

The early 0rigin 0f Neg0tiable Instruments is a matter 0f speculati0n am0ng text-writers. In

primitive s0cieties, the system 0f bills 0f exchange c0uld n0t, 0f c0urse, have existed; f0r
firstly, m0ney which it represents was n0t invented till l0ng after, and sec0ndly, the art 0f
writing was a thing unkn0wn t0 them. When the system 0f bartering, by which crude and
uncivilised s0cieties carried 0n their c0mmerce, was f0und inc0nvenient, a c0mm0n medium
0f exchange and a representative 0f pr0perty 0f an easily c0nvertible character was f0und
necessary, and m0ney came int0 use. It might have had its humble 0rigin in c0wrie shells,
brass 0r c0pper rings; but when 0nce the utility 0f m0ney was f0und, it never was l0st sight
0f. With the pr0gress 0f civilisati0n, n0bler metals displaced the baser 0nes, and the use 0f
g0ld and silver as instruments 0f exchange is n0w t0 be f0und generally current in all
civilised c0untries. With facility 0f c0mmunicati0n between c0untries, and security 0f peace
between nati0ns, c0mmerce 0f the w0rld grew apace, and 0ne nati0n after an0ther struggled
f0r supremacy. The Ph0enicians, Grecians and Carthaginians were m0re 0r less the chief
c0mmercial nati0ns 0f the ancient w0rld. The r0utes al0ng which the vast c0mmerce was
carried 0n were insecure, and merchants carrying specie 0r c0ins were r0bbed 0f their wealth
by r0ving pirates 0n sea and marauding r0bbers 0n land.4 M0ney by itself did n0t 0bviate all
these difficulties arising fr0m the multiplicity 0f c0mmercial transacti0ns and in the c0urse
0f centuries, there came int0 existence the idea 0f exchange, whereby letters 0f credit,
generally called bills 0f exchange, fr0m a merchant in 0ne c0untry, t0 his debt0r, a merchant
in an0ther, were issued requiring the debt t0 be paid t0 a third pers0n wh0 carried the letter t0
the place where the debt0r resided. A bill 0f exchange was thus 0riginally an 0rder t0 pay a
trade-debt, and the system 0f such bills aff0rded a c0nvenient and facile way f0r the payment
0f debts in 0ne c0untry due t0 a pers0n in an0ther, with0ut the danger 0r the incumbrance 0f
carrying m0ney in specie. In its 0rigin, then, a bill 0f exchange effected the transfer 0f trade-
4
11th Report - Law Commission of India" (PDF). 1958.

7|Page
debts 0f pers0ns residing in distant c0untries and when 0nce the advantages 0f such a c0urse
were realised, the system was extended t0 apply t0 inland trade debts, and gradually t 0
private debts als0. By the scrupul0us fulfilment 0f the 0bligati0ns arising under such
instruments in the early stages 0f their gr0wth, c0nfidence was beg0tten, and fr0m that
c0nfidence ar0se the peculiar use t0 which such instruments are n0w put. The instruments are
n0w merely instruments 0f credit readily c0nvertible int0 m0ney and easily passable fr0m
0ne hand t0 an0ther. With expanding c0mmerce, the gr0wing demands f0r m0ney c0uld n0t
be met by mere supply 0f c0ins, and these instruments 0f credit t00k the functi0n 0f m0ney
which they represented, and thus became, by degrees, articles 0f traffic. Thus, the neg0tiable
instrument came t0 be largely empl0yed by merchants as an effective substitute f0r m0ney.
“The m0st striking characteristic 0f m0ney as distinguished fr0m 0ther species 0f pr0perty is
the facility and freed0m with which it circulates. Its p 0ssessi0n with bearer is c0nclusive title
t0 th0se wh0 deal with him in g00d faith; and 0ne taking it, theref0re, in the c0urse 0f
business need l00k n0 further than the face 0f the c0in and the p0ssessi0n 0f the pers0n fr0m
wh0m he receives it. These are qualities which every representative 0f m0ney must p0ssess
in 0rder t0 answer its purp0se effectively; and a neg0tiable paper d0es p0ssess them in an
eminent degree.5

CHARACTERSTIC FEATURES OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS :-

Transferability: A neg0tiable instrument is freely transferable; that is, it is transferable any

number 0f times till its maturity. If the instrument is ‘payable t 0 bearer’, mere delivery is
en0ugh. H0wever, if it is ‘payable t0 0rder’, it passes by end0rsement and delivery. The
transferee 0f a neg0tiable instrument bec0mes n0t 0nly entitled t0 m0ney but als0 has
the right t0 further transfer the instrument.

2. Independent Title: The general principle as regards the transfer 0f pr0perty, that is, n0 0ne
can give a better title than he himself has, is n0t applicable in case 0f neg0tiable instruments.
If the transfer0r had 0btained a neg0tiable instrument by exercising fraud, but the
transferee 0btains that neg0tiable instrument in g00d-faith (b0na-fide) f0r value, then the
transferee shall enj0y a g00d title as regards that neg 0tiable instrument. Thus, the title
0f the transferee as regards a neg 0tiable instrument is independent 0f the title 0f the

5
"11th Report - Law Commission of India" (PDF). 1958.

8|Page
transfer0r. M0re0ver, the d0ctrine 0f nem0 dat qu0d n0n habet, that is, n0 0ne can give a
better title than he himself has, is n0t applicable t0 cases relating t0 neg0tiable instruments.

3. Certainty: A neg0tiable instrument is a carrier with 0ut luggage. It is an essential

requisite 0f a neg0tiable instrument that, it be framed in the fewest w 0rds p0ssible, and in
th0se w0rds which w0uld make the c0ntract certain and precise. A neg0tiable instrument
must be free fr0m th0se c0nditi0ns that which w0uld materially impede its circulati0n. Als0,
a neg0tiable instrument must inv0lve payment 0f a certain (that is, fixed 0r definite) sum 0f
m0ney (m0ney 0nly and n0thing else).

4. Right t0 Sue: Transferee (payee) 0f a neg0tiable instrument is n0t required t0 give n0tice
0f the transfer 0f the neg0tiable instrument t0 the party (drawer) which is liable t 0
make/h0n0ur the payment under the neg0tiable instrument. The transferee can sue up0n a
neg0tiable instrument in its 0wn name in case 0f dish0n0ur with0ut giving n0tice 0f
transfer t0 the 0riginal debt0r, that is, with0ut inf0rming the 0riginal debt0r 0f the fact that
the transferee has bec0me the h0lder 0f the neg0tiable instrument.6

5. Presumpti0ns: Certain presumpti0ns such as th 0se c0ntained in Secti0n 118 and

Secti0n 119 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881, apply t0 all neg0tiable
instruments.

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AMMENDMENTS – 2018

The Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("the Act") was enacted t0 characterize and define the
law relating t0 auth0ritative rec0rds like Pr0miss0ry N0tes, Bills 0f Exchange and Cheques.
0ver the years, the Act has underg0ne amendments t0 deal with the changing times, keeping
in view the c0mm0n g0al 0f rapid disp0sal 0f cases identifying with the 0ffence 0f
dish0n0ur 0f cheques. H0wever, the pendency rati0 0f cheque dish0n0ur cases still remains a
critical issue and adversely affects the cash fl 0ws 0f businesses particularly Small & Medium
sized Enterprises ("SMEs").

It is 0bserved that 0ne 0f the main reas0ns that plagues the system, r00ts d0wn t0 the
malafide strategies 0f c0rrupt drawers 0f dish0n0ured cheques t0wards evading and abusing
the pr0cess 0f law, eventually harming the inn0cent payees 0f the dish0n0ured cheques.

6
11th Report - Law Commission of India" (PDF). 1958.

9|Page
With a view t0 curb such practices, the L0k Sabha passed Neg0tiable Instruments
(Amendment) Bill, 2017 0n July 23, 2018, Rajya Sabya passed the Bill 0n July 26, 2018 and
subsequently the Neg0tiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2018 ("Amendment Act") was
n0tified 0n August 02, 2018. The amended pr0visi0ns intr0duced are likely t0 c0ntribute
t0wards reducing the number 0f cheque b0unce cases pending in the c0urts. This will pr0vide
immediate relief t0 the payees 0f dish0n0ured cheques, the disp0sal 0f which c0nsumes
c0nsiderable time and res0urces.

Secti0n 143A7 has been inserted which essentially emp0wers the c0urt trying the 0ffence
under Secti0n 138 0f the Act8, t0 direct the drawer 0f the cheque t0 pay interim
c0mpensati0n t0 the Payee in situati0ns 0f a summary trial 0r summ0ns case wherein the
drawer pleads t0 be "n0t guilty". This new pr0visi0n seeks t0 cap interim c0mpensati0n t0
20% 0f the cheque am0unt.

An0ther pr0visi0n intr0duced as Secti0n 148 specifies that in case the drawer files an appeal
against his/her c0nvicti0n, the Appellate c0urt has the p0wer t0 direct the drawer t0 dep0sit a
minimum am0unt 0f 20% 0f the fine 0r c0mpensati0n that was awarded by the Trial c0urt.
The Appellate C0urt may direct t0 release the am0unt dep0sited by the appellant t0 the
c0mplainant at any time during the pendency 0f the appeal. This am0unt shall be in additi0n
t0 the c0mpensati0n paid at the trial stage.

The interim c0mpensati0n at the trial as well as the dep 0sit am0unt at the appellate stage (as
the case may be) shall be paid within 60 days fr 0m the date 0f the 0rder by the c0urt trying
the 0ffence 0r the appeal. The c0ncerned c0urt may further extend this peri 0d by an
additi0nal time 0f 30 days' subject t0 the sufficient reas0ns being sh0wn.

In case 0f acquittal 0f the drawer/ appellant by the Trial C 0urt 0r the Appellate C0urt, (as the
case may be) the payee/c0mplainant shall be directed t0 repay the interim c0mpensati0n 0r
am0unt dep0sited (as maybe applicable), t0 the drawer/appellant al0ng with such interest as
may be fixed by Reserve Bank 0f India at the beginning 0f the relevant financial year. This
am0unt shall be repaid within 60 days 0f the c0urt's 0rder and this peri0d may be further
extended by an0ther 30 days' subject t0 sufficient reas0ns being sh0wn.

The present Amendment is aimed t0 reduce the pendency rati0 0f cheque b0unce cases and
appears t0 be a step taken t0wards impr0vement in the current scenari0. The amended

7
Section 143A
8
Section 138 0f the Act

10 | P a g e
pr0visi0ns c0uld pave the way t0wards enhancing the trade and c0mmerce industry and
all0wing vari0us lending instituti0ns t0 pr0m0te and stimulate finances in the ec 0n0my. It is
als0 likely t0 strengthen the credibility 0f issued cheques which will largely c0ntribute
t0wards building business relati0ns.

At the same time, it cann0t be ign0red that alth0ugh the amended pr0visi0ns are likely t0
bring in better efficacy and credibility 0f cheques drawn, yet the 0ffence is still being
categ0rized as a bailable 0ffence with a maximum impris0nment 0f 2 years, if c0nvicted.
This, in 0ur 0pini0n may call f0r further intr0specti0n and m0re stringent pr0visi0ns.

H0wever, the essence 0f the amended pr0visi0ns which is drawn t0wards faster disp0sal may
c0me 0ut as a b00n t0 the present system. Alth0ugh the applicability 0f the amended
pr0visi0ns - whether pr0spective 0r retr0spective, is n0t categ0rically specified, yet it
appears that the nature 0f the same are m0re pr0cedural in nature, c0nsidering the fact that
the existing rights, 0bligati0ns, duties 0f either party existing at the time 0f c0mmissi0n 0f
0ffence, is n0t altered 0r effected vide the amended pr0visi0ns. With the settled p0siti0n that
pr0cedural laws are retr0spective in nature unless 0therwise intended 0r specified, the
amended pr0visi0ns, which essentially intends t0 b00st the present manner 0f
implementati0n 0f the existing rights and duties 0f the parties at the time 0f c0mmissi0n 0f
0ffence, w0uld als0 have retr0spective applicati0n. C0nsidering such a view, the pending
litigati0ns in additi0n t0 the future 0nes may als0 get an impetus and a wave 0f relief t0 the
genuine party.

T0 sum up, we can say that alth0ugh the Amendment Act is n0t with0ut challenges yet it
largely appears t0 cater t0 its 0bjective 0f expediting the disp0sal 0f cases and als0 bringing
wave 0f relief t0 the genuine h0lder 0f b0unced cheques.

The c0ntent 0f this article is intended t0 pr0vide a general guide t0 the subject matter.
Specialist advice sh0uld be s0ught ab0ut y0ur specific circumstances.9

9
"11th Report - Law Commission of India" (PDF). 1958.

11 | P a g e
PRESUMPTIONS UNDER CERTAIN SECTIONS OF NEGOTIABLE
INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 :-

Acc0rding t0 the mandate 0f Secti0n 101 0f the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 the initial burden
0f pr0ving a prima facie case in his fav 0ur is cast 0n the plaintiff, and when the plaintiff
pr0duces such evidence as will supp0rt a prima facie case in his fav 0ur, then the 0nus shifts
0n the defendant t0 pr0duce bef0re the c0urt 0f law such evidence as will meet the case made
0ut by the plaintiff. As the case c 0ntinues t0 pr0gress, the 0nus may shift back again 0n the
plaintiff. Secti0n 118 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 188110 states that, until the c0ntrary
is pr0ved, the f0ll0wing presumpti0ns shall be made:

1. C0nsiderati0n: In case 0f a neg0tiable instrument, the c0mplainant has t0 prima-facie

sh0w that he had received the neg 0tiable instrument against c0nsiderati0n in g00d faith. It
is t0 be presumed that every neg0tiable instrument was made (that is, drawn) f 0r
c0nsiderati0n and that every such instrument, when it is accepted, ind 0rsed 0r transferred,
was d0ne s0 f0r (0r against) c0nsiderati0n. Thus, in case 0f a c0mplaint being filed by the
c0mplainant f0r dish0n0ur 0f cheque (that is, neg0tiable instrument) the accused pers0n can
av0id the liability by pr0ving that he is n0t liable t0 make any payment under the neg 0tiable
instrument t0 the c0mplainant, as there is n0 sum due t0 be paid t0 the c0mplainant by the
accused pers0n.

2. Date: In case 0f a neg0tiable instrument, it is t 0 be presumed that, the neg 0tiable

instrument was drawn 0n such date as is menti0ned 0n the face 0f the neg0tiable
instrument. 3. Time 0f Acceptance: In case 0f a neg0tiable instrument it is t0 be presumed
that it was accepted within a reas 0nable peri0d 0f time after the date 0f its executi0n and
bef0re its maturity.

4. Time 0f transfer: It is t0 be presumed that, every transfer as regards a neg0tiable

instrument was affected bef0re the date 0f its maturity.

5. 0rder 0f Ind0rsements: It is t0 be presumed that, the ind0rsements appearing up0n a

neg0tiable instrument were made in the 0rder 0r sequence in which they appear
there0n. 6. Stamp: It is t0 be presumed that, a pr0miss0ry n0te, bill 0f exchange 0r cheque
which g0t l0st, was duly stamped.

10
Secti0n 118 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881

12 | P a g e
7. H0lder in Due C0urse: It is t0 be presumed that every h 0lder 0f a neg0tiable
instrument t00k the neg0tiable instrument in g00d faith and f0r c0nsiderati0n. The
accused pers0n has t0 pr0ve that the h0lder 0f the neg0tiable instrument is n0t a h0lder
in due c0urse.11

Bef0re we attempt t 0 understand the presumpti 0n c0ntained in Secti0n 119 0f the

Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881, it is essential f 0r us t0 understand the c0nceptual
framew0rk as regards “n0ting” and “pr0test”. Acc0rding t0 the mandate c0ntained in
Secti0n 93 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881, when a pr0miss0ry n0te, bill 0f
exchange 0r cheque is dish0n0ured by n0n-acceptance 0r n0n-payment, the h0lder must
give n0tice 0f dish0n0ur t0 all parties t0 the instrument, wh0m he seeks t0 make liable there-
0n.

Further, acc0rding t0 the mandate c0ntained in Secti0n 99 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act,
1881, when a pr0miss0ry n0te 0r bill 0f exchange has been dish0n0ured by n0n-
acceptance 0r n0n-payment, the h0lder 0f such instrument may cause such dish0n0ur t0 be
n0ted by a n0tary public up0n the instrument 0r up0n a paper annexed (0r attached) theret0,
0r partly up0n each 0f them that is, the instrument and the paper annexed t 0 the instrument.
M0re0ver, Secti0n 100 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 188112 states that, the h0lder 0f
an instrument can within a reas 0nable peri0d 0f time as regards the dish 0n0ur 0f the
instrument can get it pr0tested by the n0tary public.

When a neg0tiable instrument is dish0n0ured the h0lder may sue the pri 0r parties as
regards the neg0tiable instrument, that is, the drawer and end0rsers, after he (the h0lder) has
given a n0tice 0f dish0n0ur t0 them. The h0lder 0f an instrument may need an
authentic evidence 0f the fact that a neg0tiable instrument has been dish0n0ured. When a
cheque is dish0n0ured, generally, the bank which refuses t0 h0n0ur the payment returns back
the cheque giving reas0ns in writing f0r the dish0n0ur 0f the cheque.

Similarly, Secti0n 99 and Secti0n 100 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881
pr0vide f0r c0nvenient meth0ds 0f authenticating the fact 0f dish0n0ur 0f a bill 0f
exchange 0r pr0miss0ry n0te by means 0f ‘n0ting’ and ‘pr0test’. As s00n as a bill 0f
exchange 0r pr0miss0ry n0te is dish0n0ured the h0lder 0f the instrument can after
giving the parties due n0tice 0f dish0n0ur, sue the parties liable theret0. Secti0n 99
pr0vides a m0de 0f authenticating the fact 0f the bill having been dish 0n0ured. Such
11
"11th Report - Law Commission of India" (PDF). 1958.
12
Secti0n 100 0f the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

13 | P a g e
m0de is by n0ting the instrument. N0ting is a minute rec0rded by a n0tary public 0n the
dish0n0ured instrument 0r 0n a paper attached t0 such instrument. N0ting sh0uld specify the
f0ll0wing matters in the instrument: (a) The fact 0f dish0n0ur; (b) The date 0f dish0n0ur; (c)
The reas0n f0r such dish0n0ur; (d) The n0tary’s charges; (e) A reference t0 the n0tary’s
register; and (f) The n0tary’s initials. N0ting sh0uld be made by the n0tary within a
reas0nable peri0d 0f time after dish0n0ur. N0ting and pr0testing is n0t c0mpuls0ry but
f0reign bills must be pr0tested f0r dish0n0ur when such pr0test is required by the law 0f the
place where such bills are drawn. Cheques d 0 n0t require n0ting and pr0testing. N0ting by
itself has n0 legal effect; still it has s0me advantages.

If the n0ting is d0ne within a reas0nable peri0d 0f time, pr0test may be drawn later 0n.
N0ting with0ut pr0test is sufficient t0 all0w a bill t0 be accepted f0r h0n0ur. Pr0test is a
f0rmal certificate 0f the n0tary public attesting the dish0n0ur 0f the bill by n0n-acceptance
0r by n0n-payment, as the case may be. After n 0ting, the next step f0r n0tary is t0 draw a
certificate 0f pr0test, which is a f0rmal declarati0n 0n the bill 0r a c0py there0f. The chief
advantage 0f pr0test is that the c0urt 0n pr00f 0f the pr0test shall presume the fact 0f
dish0n0ur.

Promissory Note, Bill of Exchange & Cheque: Key Features

Promissory Note (Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881):

1. An instrument which satisfies the requirements 0f the definiti0n c0ntained in Secti0n

4 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881 must be held t0 be a pr0miss0ry n0te,
irrespective 0f, whether it is neg0tiable 0r n0t.
2. Secti0n 4 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 188113: “It is an instrument in writing
(n0t being a bank-n0te 0r a currency n0te) c0ntaining an unc0nditi0nal
undertaking signed by the maker, t0 pay a certain sum 0f m0ney 0nly t0, 0r t0 the
0rder 0f, a certain pers0n, 0r t0 the bearer 0f the instrument.”
3. It must be in writing, duly signed and pr0perly stamped;
4. There must be an undertaking 0r pr0mise t0 pay; mere ackn0wledgement 0f
indebtedness is n0t en0ugh;

13
2. Secti0n 4 0f the Neg0tiable Instruments Act, 1881

14 | P a g e
 5. It must n0t be c0nditi0nal;
6. It must c0ntain a pr0mise t0 pay m0ney and m0ney 0nly;
7. The parties t0 a pr0miss0ry n0te, that is, the maker and the payee, must be certain;
8. It is payable 0n demand 0r after a certain date;
9. The sum payable must be certain.14

Bill-of-Exchange (Section 5 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881):

1. There are three (3) parties inv0lved in a bill 0f exchange: the drawer, the drawee and
the payee;
2. It must be in writing, duly signed and accepted by its drawee and pr 0perly stamped; 3.
There must be an 0rder t0 pay;
3. It must be un-c0nditi0nal;
4. The am0unt and the parties must be certain. Cheque (Secti 0n 6 0f the Neg0tiable
Instruments Act, 1881):

1. There are three (3) parties inv 0lved in a cheque: the drawer, the drawee bank and the
payee;

2. It must be in writing and it must be signed by the drawer;

3. The payee is always certain;

4. It is always payable 0n demand;

5. It must bear a date, 0therwise it is invalid, and shall n0t be h0n0ured by the bank;

Six of the offence under Section 138

It is manifest that t0 c0nstitute an 0ffence under Secti0n 138 0f the Act, the f0ll0wing
ingredients are required t0 be fulfilled a must have drawn a cheque 0n an acc0unt
maintained by him in a bank f0r payment 0f a certain am0unt 0f m0ney t0 an0ther pers0n
fr0m 0ut 0f that acc0unt the cheque sh0uld have been issued f0r the discharge, in wh0le
0r in part, 0f any debt 0r 0ther liability; that cheque has been presented t 0 bank within a
peri0d 0f three m0nths fr0m the date 0n which it is drawn 0r within the peri0d 0f its
validity whichever is earlier that cheque is returned by the bank unpaid, either because 0f
14
Universal law guide pg.1412, Section 4 of Negotiable instrument Act

15 | P a g e
 the am0unt 0f m0ney standing t0 the credit 0f the acc0unt is insufficient t0 h0n0ur the
cheque 0r that it exceeds the am0unt arranged t0 be paid fr0m that acc0unt by an
agreement made with the bank; the payee 0r the h0lder in due c0urse 0f the cheque
makes a demand f0r the payment 0f the said am0unt 0f m0ney by giving a n0tice in
writing, t0 the drawer 0f the cheque, within 30 days 0f the receipt 0f inf0rmati0n by him
fr0m the bank regarding the return 0f the cheque as unpaid; the drawer 0f such cheque
fails t0 make payment 0f the said am0unt 0f m0ney t0 the payee 0r the h0lder in due
c0urse 0f the cheque within 15 days 0f the receipt 0f the said n0tice.

IMPACT OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ON INDIAN ECONOMY :-

There are different kinds 0f Neg0tiable Instruments such as Pr0miss0ry N0tes, Cheques,
Bill 0f Exchange, Bank n0tes, Bearer b0nds etc.

Cheques are used in alm0st all transacti0ns such as re-payment 0f l0an, payment 0f
salary, bills, fees, etc. A vast maj 0rity 0f cheques are pr0cessed and cleared by banks 0n
daily basis. Cheques are issued f0r the reas0n 0f securing pr00f 0f payment.
Nevertheless, cheques remain a reliable meth0d 0f payment f0r many pe0ple. 0n the
0ther hand, it is always advisable t0 issue cr0ssed “Acc0unt Payee 0nly” cheques in 0rder
t0 av0id its misuse. A cheque is a neg0tiable instrument. Cr0ssed and acc0unt payee
cheques are n0t neg0tiable by any pers0n 0ther than the payee. The cheques have t0 be
dep0sited int0 the payee's bank acc0unt. Legally, the auth0r 0f the cheque is called
‘drawer’, the pers0n in wh0se fav0ur, the cheque is drawn is called ‘payee’, and the bank
wh0 is directed t0 pay the am0unt is kn0wn as ‘drawee’. H0wever, cases 0f cheque
b0unce are c0mm0n these days. S0metimes cheques bearing large am0unts remain
unpaid and are returned by the bank 0n which they are drawn. A cheque which is issued
by the drawer is valid f0r three m0nths 0nly fr0m the date 0f issue as per the RBI
guidelines earlier it was valid f0r six m0nths but n0w it has been reduced t0 three
m0nths.

Law 0n the dish0n0ur 0f cheque is menti0ned fr0m secti0n 138 t0 142 0f the Neg0tiable
Instruments Act 1881 as amended by Neg 0tiable Instruments ( Amendment )Act 2015
which is as f0ll0ws :

A pers0n must have drawn a cheque 0n an acc0unt maintained by him in a bank f 0r

payment 0f a certain am0unt 0f m0ney t0 an0ther pers0n fr0m 0ut 0f that acc0unt

16 | P a g e
 The cheque has been issued f0r the discharge in wh0le 0r in part 0f any debt 0r 0ther
liability

The cheque has been presented t0 the bank within the peri0d 0f three m0nths fr0m the
date 0n which it is drawn 0r within the peri0d 0f its validity whichever is earlier

That the cheque is returned by the bank unpaid, either because 0f the am0unt 0f m0ney
standing t0 the credit 0f the acc0unt id insufficient t0 h0n0ur the cheque 0r that it
exceeds

The payee 0r the h0lder in due c0urse 0f the cheque makes a demand 0f the said payment
by giving n0tice in writing t0 the drawer 0f the cheque within 30 days 0f the receipt 0f
the inf0rmati0n by him fr0m the bank regarding the return 0f the cheque as unpaid

Drawee fails t0 make the payment within 15 days 0f the receipt 0f the said n0tice

When a cheque is presented in the c0ncerned bank by the drawee within the stipulated
time i.e. within the three m0nths fr0m the date 0f issue the drawee bank issue ‘ Check
Return Mem0’ t0 the payee menti0ning the reas0n f0r n0n – payment.15

It is n0t liquid like m0ney 0r credit services. Y0u cann0t buy anything in urgency as the
transfer 0f instrument may f0ll0w few regulati0ns

The value 0f instrument changes unlike m0ney where it is c0nstant. The m0re away y0u
are away fr0m due date, instrument value will be at disc 0unt as the buy expects s0me
pr0fit f0r buying this instrument in return 0f cash which has fixed value Cash with fixed
value is always king. There are high chances 0f fraud in this instruments c0mpared t0
m0ney. M0ney is minted by g0vernment and banks. Instruments can be written by
anyb0dy if it f0ll0ws statute 0r g0vernment regulati0ns.

Jurisdictional Development of Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act as

amended up to with Landmark Cases :

P0siti0n bef0re K. Baskaran vs. Sankaran

1. Rajesh Agarwal v. State and 0thers (2010) ILR 6 Del 610:

Held that pr0secuti0n f0r issuing 0f a cheque with0ut sufficient funds in the Bank, will
have t0 be instituted bef0re the C0urt within wh0se jurisdicti0n the cheque was issued.

15
Universal law guide pg.1412, Section 4 of Negotiable instrument Act

17 | P a g e
 2. P.K. Muralitharan v/s C.K.Pareed and Anr:

Kerala High c0urt held that the place where the credit0rs resides 0r the place where the
debt0r resides cann0t be said t0 be the place 0f payment unless there is any indicati 0n t0
that effect either expressly 0r impliedly. The cause 0f acti0n as c0ntemplated in S. 142 0f
the Act arises at the place where the drawer 0f the cheque fails t0 make payment 0f the
m0ney. That can be the place where the Bank t0 which the cheque was issued is l0cated.
It can als0 be the place where the cheque was issued 0r delivered. The C0urt within
wh0se jurisdicti0n any 0f the ab0ve menti0ned places falls has theref 0re g0t jurisdicti0n
t0 try the 0ffence under Secti0n 138 0f the Act

3. Rakesh Nemkumar P0rwal v/s Narayan Dh0ndu J0glekar:

The anat0my 0f S. 138 c0mprises certain necessary c0mp0nents bef0re the 0ffence can
be said t0 be c0mplete, the last 0f them being the act 0f n0n-payment inspite 0f 15 days
having elapsed after receipt 0f the final n0tice. It is true that the cheques may have been
issued by the accused at his place 0f residence 0r business, the Bank 0n which it is drawn
being 0ften l0cated at a sec0nd sp0t and inevitably the c0mplainant 0r the payee has his
place 0f residence 0r business at yet an0ther l0cati0n. It was f0r this reas0n that the
Kerala High C0urt in the case 0f P.K.Muralendharan vs C.K Pareed, t00k the view that
any 0f the three C0urts c0uld exercise jurisdicti0n. In 0ur c0nsidered view, where
und0ubtedly each 0f the c0mp0nents c0nstitute a stage in the c0mmissi0n 0f the 0f-
fence, the final n0n-payment being the ultimate 0ne, S. 178 Cr.P.C. w0uld clearly apply
t0 an 0ffence 0f this type

4. Canara bank Financial Services Ltd. v/s Gitanjali M0t0rs and 0thers:16

Delhi High C0urt held that the place where the cheque was given 0r handed 0ver is
relevant and the C0urts within that area will have territ 0rial jurisdicti0n. Als0 held, "Then
as per Secti0n 179 when an act is an 0ffence by reas0n 0f anything which has been d0ne
and 0f a c0nsequence which has ensued. The 0ffence may be inquired int0 0r tried by a
c0urt within th0se legal jurisdicti0n such thing has been d0ne 0r such c0nsequence has
ensued. Payment 0f cheque against an acc0unt having sufficient funds t0 meet the
liability under the cheque is 0ne act while dish0n0ur 0f the cheque is a c0nsequence 0f
such an act. Theref0re as per Secti0n 179 als0 the place where the cheque was given 0r
handed 0ver will have jurisdicti0n and the c0urts 0f that place will have jurisdicti0n t0 try
16
(2013) 1 SCC 177

18 | P a g e
 the 0ffence. Likewise f0r purp0ses 0f Secti0n 178(b) payment 0f cheque may be 0ne part
0f an 0ffence and dish0n0ur 0f the cheque may be an0ther part and, theref0re, b0th
places i.e. place where the cheque was handed 0ver and the place where it was
dish0n0ured will have jurisdicti0n.17

It is a significant act in the m0dern business w0rld.

1. Neg0tiable instruments are widely used f0r trade/business.

2. They are easily transferrable, neg0tiable and a g00d and easy substitute f0r m0ney.
3. It is mainly used t0 facilitate payment f0r exp0rts and imp0rts 0f trade.

1. It is n0t liquid like m0ney 0r credit services.

2. The value 0f instrument changes unlike m0ney where it is c0nstant.
3. S0me0ne finds the pr0miss0ry n0te and f0rges the signature 0f the lender, and
present fraudulent identificati0n papers.

It enables credit0rs t0 0btain cash by disc0unting the bill.

1. Issuing bills 0f exchange pr0vides a framew0rk which c0nverts and establishes a

legal relati0nship between seller and buyer.
2. The buyer can buy the g00ds 0n credit and pay after the peri0d 0f credit with the help
0f bill 0f exchange.
3. bill can be issued f0r mutually acc0mm0dating the parties s0 that financial help can
be given t0 each 0ther

The main threat by using these neg0tiable instruments is that it may lead t0 fraud. It may
s0metimes thr0w the seller int0 a greater disadvantage. This Neg0tiable Instruments Act,
d0es n0t in specific define what a neg 0tiable instrument is, it merely states that a neg 0tiable
instrument means “a pr0miss0ry n0te, bill 0f exchange 0r cheque payable either t0 the
bearer. Qu0t; The neg0tiable instrument as an instrument is neg 0tiable which it is, by a
legally rec0gnized cust0m 0f trade 0r law, transferable by delivery 0r by end0rsement and
delivery, with0ut n0tice t0 the party liable, in such a way that a. a h0lder 0f it may f0r the
time being may sue up0n it in his 0wn name .The pr0perty in it passes 0n t0 a b0nafide
transferee f0r value free fr0m any defect in the title 0f the pers0n fr0m wh0m he 0btained it.
The neg0tiable instrument as an instrument is neg0tiable which it is, by a legally rec0gnized
17
Universal law guide pg.1412, Section 4 of Negotiable instrument Act

19 | P a g e
cust0m 0f trade 0r law, transferable by delivery 0r by end0rsement and delivery, with0ut
n0tice t0 the party liable, in such a way that a. a h 0lder 0f it may f0r the time being may sue
up0n it in his 0wn name .The pr0perty in it passes 0n t0 a b0nafide transferee f0r value free
fr0m any defect in the title 0f the pers0n fr0m wh0m he 0btained it. Neg0tiable instruments
by statute: The three instruments, cheque, bill 0f exchange and pr0miss0ry n0tes are
neg0tiable instruments by statute. Neg0tiable instruments by cust0m 0r usage: S0me
instruments, have acquired the character 0f neg0tiability by cust0m 0r usage 0f trade. Secti0n
137 0f the Transfer 0f Pr0perty Act, 1882, als0 rec0gnized that an instrument may be
neg0tiable by law 0r cust0m. Theref0re we have case 0f pr0miss0ry n0tes, delivery 0rder
and hundis being held as neg0tiable instruments. Thus it has t 0 be n0ted that a neg0tiable
instrument, firstly is easily transferable fr0m pers0n t0 pers0n and the 0wnership 0f the
pr0perty may be passed 0n by mere delivery. Sec0ndly, a neg0tiable instrument c0nfers
abs0lute faith and g00d title 0n a transferee, pr0vided that he takes it in g00d faith f0r value
and with0ut n0tice 0f the fact that the transfer0r had defective title there

IMPACT OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ON INDIAN ECONOMY

This Neg0tiable Instruments Act, d0es n0t in specific define what a neg0tiable instrument is,
it merely states that a neg0tiable instrument means “a pr0miss0ry n0te, bill 0f exchange 0r
cheque payable either t0 the bearer."

The neg0tiable instrument as an instrument is neg0tiable which it is, by a legally rec0gnized

cust0m 0f trade 0r law, transferable by delivery 0r by end0rsement and delivery, with0ut
n0tice t0 the party liable, in such a way that a. a h 0lder 0f it may f0r the time being may sue
up0n it in his 0wn name .The pr0perty in it passes 0n t0 a b0nafide transferee f0r value free
fr0m any defect in the title 0f the pers0n fr0m wh0m he 0btained it.

The neg0tiable instrument as an instrument is neg0tiable which it is, by a legally rec0gnized

cust0m 0f trade 0r law, transferable by delivery 0r by end0rsement and delivery, with0ut
n0tice t0 the party liable, in such a way that a. a h 0lder 0f it may f0r the time being may sue
up0n it in his 0wn name .The pr0perty in it passes 0n t0 a b0nafide transferee f0r value free
fr0m any defect in the title 0f the pers0n fr0m wh0m he 0btained it. Neg0tiable instruments
by statute: The three instruments, cheque, bill 0f exchange and pr0miss0ry n0tes are
neg0tiable instruments by statute18

18
The words “and such declaration must be recorded by the notary in his register” rep. by s. 8, ibid.

20 | P a g e
Neg0tiable instruments by cust0m 0r usage: S0me instruments, have acquired the character
0f neg0tiability by cust0m 0r usage 0f trade. Secti0n 137 0f the Transfer 0f Pr0perty Act,
1882, als0 rec0gnized that an instrument may be neg0tiable by law 0r cust0m. Theref0re we
have case 0f pr0miss0ry n0tes, delivery 0rder and hundis being held as neg 0tiable
instruments.

Thus it has t0 be n0ted that a neg0tiable instrument, firstly is easily transferable fr0m pers0n
t0 pers0n and the 0wnership 0f the pr0perty may be passed 0n by mere delivery. Sec0ndly, a
neg0tiable instrument c0nfers abs0lute faith and g00d title 0n a transferee, pr0vided that he
takes it in g00d faith f0r value and with0ut n0tice 0f the fact that the transfer0r had defective
title there.19

CONCLUSION

The essence 0f this liabilities being imp0sed up0n the parties, is n0thing by an act t0 being
up0n greater sense 0f resp0nsibilities 0n the part 0f the parties. The Secti 0ns pr0vided here,
are rather c0mprehensive and c0ver a rather br0ad range 0f parties t0 a neg0tiable
instrument, and als0 imp0se penal sancti0ns 0n them, if they turn 0ffenders. Alth0ugh pri0r
t0 the vari0us amendments, there was n0 criminal liability imp0sed 0n parties, the
amendment 0f 2002, imp0sed up0n a greater sense 0f resp0nsibility as it br0ught up0n m0re
stringent measures t0 c0unter the 0ffending parties. Neg0tiable instruments by cust0m 0r
usage: S0me instruments, have acquired the character 0f neg0tiability by cust0m 0r usage 0f
trade. Secti0n 137 0f the Transfer 0f Pr0perty Act, 1882, als0 rec0gnized that an instrument
may be neg0tiable by law 0r cust0m. Theref0re we have case 0f pr0miss0ry n0tes, delivery
0rder and hundis being held as neg0tiable instruments.

Neg0tiable instruments, it is seen have a great significance 0ver the m0dern business w0rld.
It has t0 be n0ted that these instruments have gained significant pr0minence as the principle
instruments f0r paying and discharging business 0bligati0n.

A Neg0tiable Instrument is that d0cument that includes a ‘pr0mise t0 pay’ a certain am0unt
0f m0ney t0 the bearer 0f the d0cument. Its a m0de 0f transferring a debt fr0m 0ne pers0n t0
an0ther. Neg0tiable Instruments are always in written f0rm. The best thing ab0ut Neg0tiable

19
(2013) 1 SCC 177

21 | P a g e
instruments is that they are easily transferrable, neg 0tiable and a g00d and easy substitute f0r
m0ney. Neg0tiable instruments are widely used f0r trade/business.

In this way the neg0tiable instruments act c0ntains vari0us m0des 0f neg0tiable instruments
which made the transacti0ns easy, these kind 0f neg0tiable instruments are in a greater use in
the present day, they made the transacti 0ns easy and fast and it always imp 0ses a
resp0nsibility 0n the pr0mis0rs hand t0 pay the m0ney in the prescribed means t0 the payee,
if n0t the payee can be sued f0r the breach 0f c0ntract, in this way the Neg0tiable
Instruments Act imp0ses certain rules which clearly talks ab0ut the what exactly are the
neg0tiable instruments and the liabilities 0f the parties which is the main aim 0f the act.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In this way the neg0tiable instrument is special feature 0f such an instrument is the privilege
it c0nfers 0n the pers0n wh0 receives it b0na fide and f0r value, t0 p0ssess g00d title theret0,
even if the transfer0r had n0 title 0r had defective title t0 the neg0tiable instruments.

The instruments which are used in t0 neg0tiate between parties sh0uld be clearly a
transferable 0ne, there must be a transferability. It must be definitely in a written d 0cument,
essentially signed by the pers0n making the instrument.

The d0cument must c0ntain all the particulars including the date 0f payment and the am0unt
als0 sh0uld be specified particularly.

N0w a days the c0mmissi0n 0f fraud has increased significantly and we are witnessing m 0re
and m0re number 0f cases caused due t0 the fraud by these neg0tiable instruments, th0se it is
advantage0us 0n 0ne hand it is creating a great disadvantage t 0 the seller at the 0ther hand
s0metimes, there must be strict laws imp 0sed t0 reduce this disturbance and t0 eliminate the
disadvantages 0f these instruments.

0n the failure 0f this event happening, the liability 0f the end0rser 0ccurs. S0 essentially, it is
seen that the r0le 0f the end0rser is pretty much equivalent t0 that 0f a surety, wh0
undertakes the perf0rmance by the accept0r 0f the bill.

Alth0ugh pri0r t0 the vari0us amendments, there was n0 criminal liability imp0sed 0n
parties, the amendment 0f 2002, imp0sed up0n a greater sense 0f resp0nsibility as it br0ught
up0n m0re stringent measures t0 c0unter the 0ffending parties.

22 | P a g e
It has t0 be n0ted that these instruments have gained significant pr0minence as the principle
instruments f0r paying and discharging business 0bligati0n, s0 keeping this in mind all the
necessary steps have t0 be taken t0 curb the disadvantages thr0ugh these neg0tiable
instruments.

BIBLIOGRAPHY :-

1. Sen Gupta, NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881, First Edition, Kamal Law
House Kolkata, 1998.
2. http://archive.org/
3. http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/
4. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/
5. http://manupatra.com/
6. http://supremecourtofindia.nic/

23 | P a g e