Free Essay

Negotiable Instrument

In:

Submitted By rajiimk07
Words 2204
Pages 9
se
"My only mistake was that I shot my mouth off without really doing anything. Naturally, the media made me out to be a joker."

- Vijay Kumar Sharma, Chairman, JVG Group, in 1998.

The Doomed Depositors

In October 1997, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) banned all non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) of the JVG Group of companies - JVG Finance, JVG Leasing and JVG Securities - from accepting deposits from the public. This was after an investigation revealed that these companies had been accepting deposits in excess of their stipulated limits. Soon after, JVG downed the shutters of several of its offices in small towns of Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, claiming it had detected huge irregularities in the operations. The closing of the offices created a panic among the depositors and strong voices were raised against the group in the media.
In November 1997, JVG hurriedly rented an office in Gurgaon (Haryana) to accommodate irate investors. Hundreds of investors and agents camped on the grounds of the office. The agents (or the field-workers), who raised deposits from investors on behalf of JVG, were extremely worried. They said they could not go back to their local offices without collecting the dues fearing the wrath of the investors. More and more depositors and field workers teemed over the next few days with hopes of getting their money back.
The situation seemed rather bleak with rumors of the JVG group being in deep financial crisis. At this point, JVG Chairman V.K.Sharma (Sharma) dropped another bombshell on the investors. He claimed that a majority of the certificates were fake and hence they would not be paid back. For many depositors who had invested as little as Rs 500 and who could not even dream of taking the dispute to court, it meant kissing their investments goodbye. Analysts remarked that the investors and agents had themselves to blame for the loss - because the activities of the JVG Group had always been looked at with suspicion by the industry.

JVG Group - The Background

From being a small-time contractor earning less than Rs 2500 a month, Sharma went on to run a group, which on paper had an annual turnover of Rs 1000 crore, in just seven years. Known for his lavish lifestyle - his farmhouse in Delhi, his fleet of expensive cars and the helicopter he had taken on lease to tap deposits from small towns in north India were talked about quite often. A graduate from Kurukshetra University, Sharma began his career as a materials supplier to Swadeshi Polytex in 1979. Between 1985 and 1989, Sharma supplied construction materials and equipment to contractors. In September 1989, Sharma launched his first company JVG Finance.

JVG Group - The Background Contd...

Over the next few years, the company brought over 3000 small firms under its control. Sharma also launched JVG Steels, JVG Departmental Stores, JVG Foods, JVG Petrochemicals and many other companies. In 1992, Sharma acquired San Tosha Resorts and India Cero Oil, an oil extraction unit from the Dalmias in 1993.

However, most part of the JVG empire was created largely from public fixed deposits. In the early 1990s, Sharma opened branches of his finance companies in various towns and villages. He followed it up with heavy advertising on the interest rates, which were as high as 30%. Investors flocked to buy the company's schemes and the deposit base soon crossed Rs 1000 crore. The JVG group's turnover increased from Rs 102 crore in 1994-95 to Rs 700 crore in 1995-96. Sharma was a man with strong political connections - he was close to politicians from Bihar and was involved with the Dalit Sena headed by the then railway minister Ram Vilas Paswan. It was reportedly through these connections that he was able to make JVG Department Stores one of the largest suppliers of commodities to the Government of India.

Sharma had grand plans for making JVG a Rs 12000 crore empire by 2000. He announced that he would invest over Rs 4000 crore in diverse areas such as power, cement, hotels, steel, textiles and aviation. JVG went ahead with its plans although it came in for a lot of flak in the media. Soon, JVG launched the ‘Avatar' brand of detergent and washing bars in an attempt to enter the FMCG segment. Sharma wanted to set up mega townships in Gurgaon, Patna, Mumbai and Hyderabad, and to acquire the hotel and cement interests of the Delhi-based Jaiprakash Industries, the steel units of Rathi Alloys and the aircraft of ModiLuft.1
JVG had acquired Orkay's polyester yarn plant and a part of its office space in Mumbai in March 1997 through a tripartite agreement with financial institutions led by IDBI and the Mehras who controlled Orkay. As per the agreement, JVG agreed to pay the Mehras Rs 98 crore in cash and take on the Rs 130 crore liability to the various FIs. JVG paid off Rs 14 crore to the Mehras in March 1997. According to the schedule worked out by the FIs, JVG agreed to pay the second instalment in the first week of September 1997. Although JVG could not meet the deadline, it was allowed to run the plant on job-work basis from September 1997. The understanding was that JVG would pay up by the end of September. However, JVG failed to meet the end-September deadline as well and Orkay sought the intervention of IDBI to take possession of the plant. Production at the plant was suspended in October 1997. Following this, the agreement between the Mehras, JVG and the FIs became null and void.

Detailing the Frauds

JVG’s troubles started in June 1997, after the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) asked JVG Finance to refund the Rs 45 crore it had raised from a public issue in March 1997. A day after the issue had opened, RBI issued a show-cause notice asking why JVG Finance should not be barred from accepting deposits as the group companies had already exceeded their deposit limits. By the time RBI conditionally cleared the issue after assurances from Sharma, the 70-day stipulated period for listing the shares had passed.
Because of the time-lapse, SEBI intervened and ordered the refund of the public’s money according to the allotment rules. Sharma refused to refund the money to the investors and appealed against the order to the Finance ministry. He admitted that JVG had exceeded its limits while accepting deposits but claimed that since December 1996 (much before the RBI ban) it had stopped accepting deposits on its own and had even given RBI an undertaking. RBI did not accept the argument and barred the group from accepting any more public deposits.
In September 1997, post-dated cheques issued for principal as well as interest on JVG’s deposits bounced. Investors then complained to the civil courts, consumer courts, Company Law Board and criminal courts under the Negotiable Instruments Act upon which legal proceedings were initiated against the group. The government received a large number of complaints on non-repayment of deposits on maturity by the JVG group. On a complaint filed by the RBI, the Delhi High Court ordered the winding up of the company. The court also appointed an official liquidator and said that the RBI did not consider the revival scheme filed by the company viable. The RBI also filed criminal prosecution petitions in the Metropolitan Magistrates’ Courts in New Delhi.
RBI alleged that the company had accepted deposits worth Rs 88.82 crore which was 756.68% of its net owned fund. This was much higher than the permissible limit of 25%2. Similarly, JVG Leasing had received deposits worth Rs 19.28 crore which was 147.58% of its net owned fund. The RBI complaint also said that the deposit forms issued by the JVG Group did not contain any information regarding premature withdrawals, which was necessary as per RBI provisions. The companies had not provided any information about the rate of interest to the investors on the receipts issued to them. Further, the companies failed to submit their audited balance sheets for the period ending March 31, 1994 and 1995 15 days after their annual general meeting (AGM) and did not inform the RBI about the changes in the composition of the board of directors.
RBI's petition also stated that the company had not maintained liquid assets as required by section 45IB of the RBI Act, 1934. RBI further contended that JVG Securities accepted public deposits through JVG Leasing Ltd. and had illegally credited it to the account of JVG Finance Ltd. Thus, JVG Securities facilitated collection of further deposits by JVG Finance Ltd., a company which had already accepted public deposits beyond the permissible limit in spite of the warning from RBI not to accept any further deposits.
A total of 31 bank accounts of the JVG group of companies were seized and an amount of Rs 5 lakh lying in these accounts was frozen. Land and property, including 238 acres in Gurgaon, Rewari and Faridabad, in the name of JVG group of companies were attached. Nine company vehicles were taken into police possession and a number of properties located in Bombay and Delhi (held by the company) were identified and the income-tax authorities in Delhi and Bombay were informed. Meanwhile, JVG, fearing a withdrawal rush on its deposits, asked all its depositors to send their certificates to the Delhi office for scrutiny and also issued notices in the dailies assuring investors that all deposits which had matured would be redeemed immediately.
Sharma revealed that all genuine matured amounts had been repaid and only Rs 30 crore was to be paid to depositors of JVG Finance by January 1998 and another Rs 100 crore to JVG Leasing depositors between July 1998 and June 1999. He also admitted that it was impossible for him to repay all his depositors, including those whose deposits had not matured. Sharma's allegation that his agents had issued fake certificates to depositors for more than Rs 100 crore was seen as a ploy to wash his hands off the responsibility to pay them. Analysts remarked that if the certificates were issued by agents who were handpicked by Sharma himself, he could not disown them. There was suspicion as to the dubious nature of the investments Sharma had made with the money, which had not yielded the returns he had expected. As a result, he serviced the interest on the old deposits out of fresh deposits.

After he was barred from raising fresh funds, he tried to get rid of the depositors by dubbing their certificates fake. However, Sharma claimed that his investments fetched him the expected returns. He also refuted allegations that most of his investments were in the JVG Group. He said that he had invested in automobiles, plant and machinery and other equipment through hire purchase and lease schemes, and only a minor amount was in group companies. Sharma commented that the depositors with fake certificates would anyway use their own resources to recover their money. They were sure to apprehend the agents for issuing fake certificates. He said, "We are responsible only for the proper investor who is listed with us."

Deflated Dreams

Sharma was well-known in the industry circles for shooting his mouth off. His grand comments and claims were frequently splashed in business dailies and magazines. In fact, Sharma claimed that it was only the attention he drew to himself by making grandiose announcements that led to his downfall.
In May 1998, The Economic Offence Wing of Chandigarh police lodged an FIR against Sharma under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. However, Sharma failed to appear in the court despite repeated warrants. He then moved the Mumbai High Court for transferring of all criminal cases registered in various states against the JVG group to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for further investigation. In June, the court transferred only the cases registered in Maharashtra to the CBI. The next day, Sharma moved an application for anticipatory bail in the high court, upon which he was granted interim bail till July 6. The Mumbai High Court granted four weeks bail to Sharma and directed him to appear in the appropriate court in Delhi. Sharma did not appear before any court in Delhi and went underground.
Following this, a team of officers from the Economic Offences Wing of the crime branch was sent to Mumbai in November. The team arrested Sharma at a flat in Bandra, a suburb in northwest Mumbai. In June 1999, after 16 months in jail, Sharma was granted bail on a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh and a surety of a similar amount and was directed not to leave the country without the court's permission and not to tamper with evidence. Sharma had sought bail on health grounds claiming that he was suffering from hypertension, angina and chest pain. The JVG companies were delisted and barred permanently from indulging in NBFC activities in the future. However, JVG's demise and Sharma's stint in jail would perhaps never replace the dreams and hopes of the investors whose hard-earned money had vanished forever.

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Negotiable Instruments

...In India, there is reason to believe that instrument to exchange were in use from early times and we find that papers representing money were introducing into the country by one of the Mohammedan sovereigns of Delhi in the early part of the fourtheenth century. The word 'hundi', a generic term used to denote instruments of exchange in vernacular is derived from the Sanskrit root 'hund' meaning 'to collect' and well expresses the purpose to which instruments were utilised in their origin. With the advent of British rule in India commercial activities increased to a great extent. The growing demands for money could not be met be mere supply of coins; and the instrument of credit took the function of money which they represented. Before the enactment of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, the law of negotiable instruments as prevalent in England was applied by the Courts in India when any question relating to such instruments arose between Europeans. When then parties were Hindu or Mohammedans, their personal law was held to apply. Though neither the law books of Hindu nor those of Mohammedans contain any reference to negotiable instruments as such, the customs prevailing among the merchants of the respective community were recognised by the courts and applied to the transactions among them. During the course of time there had developed in the country a strong body of usage relating to “hundis”, which even the Legislature could not without hardship to Indian bankers and merchants...

Words: 8689 - Pages: 35

Premium Essay

Negotiable Instruments

...to determine if the person currently possessing the instrument qualifies as a holder in due course. The basic definition is found in §3-302(a), which you should read carefully. Official Comment 4 to §3-302 makes it clear that the payee can qualify as a holder in due course in some rare situations. Normally, the payee is so involved in the underlying transaction that he or she has notice of problems affecting payment obligations, and thus cannot be a holder in due course. But the examples given in Official Comment 4 describe fact patterns where the payee is innocent of such knowledge and can therefore qualify for the protection given to holders in due course. See also Eldon’s Super Fresh Stores, Inc. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 296 Minn. 130, 207 N.W.2d 282, 12 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 490 (1973), for an example of the payee as a holder in due course. 35 36 3. Holders in Due Course Subsection (c) gives a list of extraordinary transactions — creditors seizing instruments by judicial process, the sale of an inventoried business (a ‘‘bulk transaction’’), or the appointment of the administrator of an estate containing negotiable instruments — in which the transferee is statutorily denied holder in due course status.1 A. ‘‘Holder’’ Note first of all that in order to be a holder in due course the possessor of the instrument must qualify as a holder. This means that the instrument must be technically negotiable and must have been technically negotiated into the hands...

Words: 34047 - Pages: 137

Free Essay

Negotiable Instruments

...Running Head: Negotiable Instruments Negotiable Instruments ACC 543 January 9, 2012 This memo attempts to analyze financial decisions problems with creating lines of credit from banks for the purpose of technological infrastructure investments. Explaining negotiable instruments will occur with recommended financing transactions. Comparing the main and secondary liabilities of the parties to the negotiable instruments and examining the parts of the secured transaction the bank recommends. This will be included in the memo. Negotiable instruments are transferable instruments used as a means of money for trading. These instruments are a promise to pay such as checks, drafts, promissory notes, and certificate of deposits. “A negotiable instrument has three principal attributes: (1) an asset or property passes from the transferor to the transferee by mere delivery or endorsement of the instrument, (2) a transferee accepting the instrument in good faith and for value obtains an indefeasible title and may sue on the instrument in his or her name, and (3) a notice of the transfer is not given to the party liable in the instrument. “ (Business Dictionary, 2012) This business wants to create a line of credit from the bank to invest money in technological infrastructure. A draft can be the negotiable instrument to use with a line of credit. Drafts contain three parties, the drawer, the drawee, and the payee. The drawer creates instructions to demand the drawee...

Words: 969 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Negotiable Instruments

...THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT LAW SECTION . 5. Additional provisions not affecting negotiability. - An instrument which contains an order or promise to do any act in addition to the payment of money is not negotiable. But the negotiable character of an instrument otherwise negotiable is not affected by a provision which authorizes the sale of collateral securities in case the instrument be not paid at maturity; or  (b) Authorizes a confession of judgment if the instrument be not paid at maturity; or  (c) Waives the benefit of any law intended for the advantage or protection of the obligor; or  (d) Gives the holder an election to require something to be done in lieu of payment of money. But nothing in this section shall validate any provision or stipulation otherwise illegal.  Acts in addition to payment of money A negotiable instrument must be payable in “a sum certain in money.” (1) General Rule. – As a general rule, the instrument is non-negotiable if it contains a promise or order to do any act in addition to the payment of money. (par. 1.) The prohibition is based on the fact that while one could be indorsed, the other would have to be assigned. (see Sec. 30) EXAMPLES: “I promise to pay or order P1,000.00 and to deliver a horse.” (2) Exceptions. – The law, however, gives exceptions (Sec. 5 [a to d.] to the general rule. a. Sale of collateral securities. EXAMPLE: “I promise to pay P or order the sum of P10,000.00 on November 25,2004...

Words: 682 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Negotiable Instrument

...Assignment on Negotiable Instrument Course Title: Legal Environment of International Business Prepared by: Farha Fatema Date of Submission: 28/04/2011 Executive Summary Negotiable instruments are written orders or unconditional promises to pay a fixed sum of money on demand or at a certain time. Promissory notes, bills of exchange, checks, drafts, and certificates of deposit are all examples of negotiable instruments. Negotiable instruments may be transferred from one person to another, who is known as a holder in due course. Upon transfer, also called negotiation of the instrument, the holder in due course obtains full legal title to the instrument. Negotiable instruments may be transferred by delivery or by endorsement and delivery. One type of negotiable instrument, called a promissory note, involves only two parties, the maker of the note and the payee, or the party to whom the note is payable. With a promissory note, the maker promises to pay a certain amount to the payee. Another type of negotiable instrument, called a bill of exchange, involves three parties. The party who drafts the bill of exchange is known as the drawer. The party who is called on to make payment is known as the drawee, and the party to whom payment is to be made is known as the payee. A check is an example of a bill of exchange, where the individual or business writing the check is the drawer, the bank is the drawee, and the person or business...

Words: 2594 - Pages: 11

Premium Essay

Type of Negotiable Instrument

...Type of Negotiable Instrument Wiley v. Peoples Bank and Trust Company Marcus Wiley, James Tate, and James Irby were partners engaged in buying and selling used cars under the trade name Wiley, Tate & Irby. Over an extended period of time, the partnership sold a number of automobiles to Billy Houston, a sole proprietor doing business as Houston Auto Sales (Houston). In connection with each purchase, Houston executed and delivered to the partnership a negotiable instrument drawn on the Peoples Bank and Trust Company of Tupelo, Mississippi. Upon delivery of each negotiable instrument, the automobiles were delivered to Houston. Each of the instruments involved in these transactions contained a number of variations in text and form. However, each of them was similar in that each was drawn on a bank, signed by the maker, and contained an unconditional order to pay a sum certain on the demand of the payee. Wiley v. Peoples Bank and Trust Company, 438 F.2d 513, Web 1971 U.S. App. Lexis 11917 (United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit) What type of negotiable instrument is involved in these transactions? As defined by the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) negotiable instruments include checks, draft, notes and certificates of deposit. Negotiable instruments must meet certain requirements for transfer. Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code states that a negotiable instrument must meet certain requirements. A negotiable instrument should be a substitute for money, act...

Words: 1805 - Pages: 8

Free Essay

Negotiable Instrument

...TYPES OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS n Draft: An unconditional order to pay by which the party creating the draft (the drawer) orders another party (the drawee), typically a bank, to pay money to a third party (the payee) -- e.g., a check. n n n n Check: A draft ordering a drawee bank and payable on demand. Time Draft: A draft payable at a time certain. Sight Draft: A draft payable on presentment. Trade Acceptance: A draft that is drawn by a seller of goods ordering the buyer to pay a specified sum of money to the seller, usually at a specified future time. The buyer accepts the draft by signing and returning it to the seller. n Promissory Note: A written promise made by one person (the maker) to pay a fixed sum of money to another person (the payee) on demand or at a specified future time. Certificate of Deposit: A note by which a bank or similar financial institution acknowledges the receipt of money from a party and promises to repay the money, plus interest, to the party on a certain date. 1 n NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS: AN OVERVIEW n A Negotiable Instrument is a: (1) written instrument, (2) signed by the maker or drawer of the instrument, (3) that contains an unconditional promise or order to pay (4) an exact sum of money (with or without interest in a specified amount or at a specified rate) (5) on demand or at an exact future time (6) to a specific person, or to order, or to its bearer. 2 NEGOTIABILITY: SIGNATURES n For an instrument to be negotiable, it must...

Words: 1157 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Law: the Negotiable Instruments Act

...THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AND THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT, 2002 Negotiable instruments are of great importance in the business world and by extension in banking. They are instruments for making payments and discharging business obligations What is a Negotiable Instrument? The Negotiable Instruments Act does not define a negotiable instrument but merely states, “ a negotiable instrument means a promissory note, bill of exchange or cheque payable either to order or bearer.” (Section 13). This section does not prohibit any other instrument that satisfies the essential features of portability. Justice K. C. Willis defines these as, “ one the property in which is acquired by anyone who takes it bonafide and for value notwithstanding any defect in title in the person from whom he took it.” Thomas defines it in his book “Commerce, Its theory and Practice “A negotiable instrument is one which is, by a legally recognized custom of trade or by law, transferable by delivery in such circumstances that (a) the holder of it for the time being may sue on it in his own name and (b) the property in it passes, free from equities, to a bona-fide transferee for value, notwithstanding any defect in the title of the transferor.” It : (1) entitles a person to a sum of money (2) is transferable (by customs of trade) by delivery, like cash, or by Endorsement and delivery and delivery, and (3) ...

Words: 22787 - Pages: 92

Premium Essay

Negotiable Instrument

...1.       Negotiable Instruments – written contracts for the payment of money; by its form, intended as a substitute for money and intended to pass from hand to hand, to give the holder in due course the right to hold the same and collect the sum due. 2.       Characteristics of Negotiable Instruments: a.       negotiability – right of transferee to hold the instrument and collect the sum due b.       accumulation of secondary contracts – instrument is negotiated from person to person 3.       Difference between Negotiable Instruments from Non-Negotiable Instruments: Negotiable Instruments | Non-negotiable Instruments  | Contains all the requisites of Sec. 1 of the NIL | does not contain all the requisites of Sec. 1 of the NIL | Transferred by negotiation | transferred by assignment | Holder in due course may have better rights than transferor | transferee acquires rights only of his transferor  | Prior parties warrant payment | prior parties merely warrant legality of title | Transferee has right of recourse against intermediate parties | transferee has no right of recourse  | 4.       Difference between Negotiable Instruments and Negotiable Documents of Title Negotiable Instruments | Negotiable Documents of Title  | Have requisites of Sec. 1 of the NIL | does not contain requisites of Sec. 1 of NIL | Have right of recourse against intermediate parties who are secondarily liable | no secondary liability of intermediate parties | Holder in due course may...

Words: 8200 - Pages: 33

Premium Essay

Negotiable Instruments

...Negotiable Instruments On the back of an envelope, Phoebe writes, “I promise to pay Quint or bearer $600 on demand. [Signed] Phoebe.” The type of instrument that is used in this scenario is a promissory note. When a promissory note is present, this is a written promise which involves two parties (Clark, Miller & Cross, 2014). The two parties that are present in a promissory note is the maker (payer) and the payee and the note may be made with a specific date mentioned or on demand-when the payee requests the money (Clark, Miller & Cross, 2014). In the scenario above, the maker is Phoebe and the payee is Quint and it the note is written to indicate that when Quint asks for the $600, Phoebe is to pay it at that time. In order for a note (or any other instrument) to be negotiable it must meet all six of the following requirements. These requirements are (Clark, Miller & Cross, 2014): 1. The instrument must be in writing-Phoebe wrote the promissory note on the back of an envelope. 2. It must be signed by the maker (payer) or the drawer-Phoebe signed the note 3. It must be an unconditional promise to pay-there were no conditions set by Phoebe that may hinder Quint from requesting payment (i.e.-I, Phoebe, will pay Quint the $600 if he calls me no later than noon on the day he requests payment) 4. The note must state a fixed amount of money-Phoebe’s promissory note listed $600. 5. The note must be payable on demand or at a definite amount of time-Phoebe’s...

Words: 554 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Negotiable Instruments

...Negotiable Instruments (Writing Assignment 6) BA 265 Business Law December 11, 2013 Negotiable Instruments Negotiable Instrument is the name of a document that promises to pay a sum of money. The document states that the singer of the document agrees to pay the owner of the document a set amount of money which is also stated on the document. On the back of an envelope, Phoebe writes, “I promise to pay Quint or bearer $600 on demand. [Signed] Phoebe.” This instrument is a promissory note and a bearer note, and it is negotiable. A promissory note is a written promise made by one person (the maker) to pay a fixed sum of money to another person (the payee) on demand or at a specified future time. The maker of this note is Phoebe. The payee is Quint or bearer. A note that is payable to a specific payee or bearer is a bearer note. A bearer is anyone holding something such as a check, promissory note, bank draft, or bond. This is important when the document states it is payable to bearer which means whoever holds this paper can receive the funds due on it. A negotiable instrument that is payable to bearer or to cash or to the order of cash that is not naming a payee, is a bearer instrument and is called bearer paper. To be negotiable, an instrument must be written, be signed by the maker or drawer, be an unconditional promise or order to pay, state a fixed amount of money, be payable on demand or at a definite time, and be payable to order or to bearer unless it is a...

Words: 422 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Claw13 Cases (Negotiable Instrument)

...Petitioner, v. THE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondent. EN BANC [G.R. No. L-2516. September 25, 1950.] ANG TEK LIAN, Petitioner, v. THE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondent. Laurel, Sabido, Almario & Laurel, for Petitioner. Solicitor General Felix Bautista Angelo and Solicitor Manuel Tomacruz, for Respondent. SYLLABUS 1. CRIMINAL LAW; ESTAFA" ; ISSUING CHECK WITH INSUFFICIENT BANK DEPOSIT TO COVER THE SAME. — One who issues a check payable to cash to accomplish deceit and knows that at the time had no sufficient deposit with the bank to cover the amount of the check and without informing the payee of such circumstances, is guilty of estafa as provided by article 315, paragraph (d), subsection 2 of the Revised Penal Code. 2. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS; CHECK DRAWN PAYABLE TO THE ORDER OF "CASH" ; INDORSEMENT. — A check payable to the order of "cash to the person presenting it for payment without the drawer’s indorsement. D E C I S I O N BENGZON, J.: For having issued a rubber check, Ang Tek Lian was convicted of estafa in the Court of First Instance of Manila. The Court of Appeals affirmed the verdict. It appears that, knowing he had no funds therefor, Ang Tek Lian drew on Saturday, November 16, 1946, the check Exhibit A upon the China Banking Corporation for the sum of P4,000, payable to the order of "cash." He delivered it to Lee Hua Hong in exchange for money which the latter handed in the act. On November 18, 1946, the next business day, the check was presented...

Words: 20070 - Pages: 81

Premium Essay

The Law on Negotiable Instrument

...THE LAW ON NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS Definition of Terms CHAPTER 1 Form and Interpretation Section 1. Form of Negotiable Instruments Commercial Paper – a written promises or obligations that arise out of commercial transactions from the use of such instruments as promissory notes and bills of exchange. Maker – the person issuing a promissory note Drawer – person issuing bill of exchange Money - medium of exchange authorized or adopted by a domestic or foreign government as part of its currency. In literal sense, the term means “cash.” It also includes all legal tender. Legal Tender – that currency which a debtor can legally compel a creditor to accept a payment of a debt in money when tendered by the debtor in the right amount. Non-negotiable Instrument – an instrument which is not negotiable, which does not meet the requirements lay down to qualify an instrument as a negotiable one, or an instrument which in its inception was negotiable but has lost its quality of negotiability. A non-negotiable instrument may not be negotiated but it may assigned or transferred Negotiable Promissory Note – an unconditional promise in writing made by one person to another, signed by the maker, engaging to pay on demand, or at a fixed or determinable future time, a sum certain in money or to bearer. It is commonly referred to as a note. Payee – the party to whom the promise is made or the instrument is payable. Bill of exchange – an unconditional...

Words: 827 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Negotiable Instrument Act 1881

...NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT,1881 Definition of a Negotiable Instrument. The law relating to negotiable instruments is contained in the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It is an Act to define and amend the law relating to promissory notes, bills of exchange and cheques. The Act does not affect the custom or local usage relating to an instrument in oriental language i.e., a Hundi. The term "negotiable instrument" means a document transferable from one person to another. However the Act has not defined the term. It merely says that "A .negotiable instrument" means a promissory note, bill of exchange or cheque payab1e either to order or to bearer. [Section 13(1)] A negotiable instrument may be defined as "an instrument, the. property in which is acquired by anyone who takes it bona fide, and for value, notwithstan~ing any defect of title in the person from whom he took it, from which it follo~s that an instrument cannot be negotiable unless it is such and in such a state that the true owner could transfer the contract or engagement contained therein by simple delivery of instrument" (Willis- The Law of Negotiable Securities, Page 6). According to this definition the following are the conditions of negotiability: (i) The instrument should be freely transferable. An instrument cannot be negotiable unless it is such and in such state that the true owner could transfer by simple delivery or endorsement and delivery. (ii) The person who takes it for value...

Words: 15663 - Pages: 63

Premium Essay

Negotiable Instrument

...LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL June 11, 2012 Tahmina Akter Lecturer Department of Finance Faculty of Business Studies University of Dhaka Dear Madam, It is an immense pleasure for us to submit the term report on “Market and Demand Analysis”, which is prepared as a partial fulfillment of the requirement of course - “Capital Budgeting and project Management” of BBA program under Department of Finance of the Faculty of Business Studies, University of Dhaka. We would like to convey our special thanks and gratitude to you for patronizing our effort & giving us proper guidance. We have tried our best to cover all the relevant fields. We earnestly request you to call us if you think any further work should be done on the topic of the report. Sincerely yours, Name | Roll | FARHANA RAHMAN | 16-04 | FARHA FARZANA | 16-06 | MD. RASEL MIAH | 16-68 | SADIA KAMAL SANCHITA | 16-70 | MARUFA AKHTAR | 16-132 | 16th Batch, Sec: B Department of Finance, Faculty of Business Studies, University of Dhaka Table of contents SerialNo. | Description | Page No. | 01 | Executive Summary | 3 | 02 | Introduction | 4 | 03 | Company Description | 5 | 04 | Product Description | 6 | 05 | Situational Analysis | 7 | 06 | Market Survey | 10 | 07 | Characterization of Market | 14 | 08 | Demand Forecasting | 15 | 09 | Uncertainties | 20 | 10 | Marketing Plan | 21 | 11 | References | 27 | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ________...

Words: 5321 - Pages: 22