Overview
The 30 September 2026 edition of IBC Laws Today—Banking & Debt Recovery presents important judicial and regulatory developments concerning cheque-dishonour proceedings, interim compensation, statutory presumptions, security cheques, interest awards, liquidation-auction deposits, labour-law reforms and contractual subrogation.
The principal cases examine the application of Sections 118, 138, 139 and 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, along with related questions concerning evidence, financial capacity, parallel proceedings and appellate review.
Details
Newsletter: IBC Laws Today—Banking & Debt Recovery
Edition date: 30 September 2026
Primary legal area: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Negotiable Instruments Act Decisions
Rana Sil v. State of West Bengal and Another
The Calcutta High Court considered whether a conviction under Section 138 could be sustained when the accused challenged the complainant’s financial capacity, demonstrated the absence of a financial trail and highlighted the non-examination of a material witness.
Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5242 HC
Bikash Bandhab Giri v. Sri Sukhdev Khatua @ Sukdeb and Another
The Calcutta High Court examined whether an order directing payment of 20% interim compensation under Section 143A required interference because it was allegedly unreasoned or prejudicial to the accused.
Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5245 HC
Haryana Agro Food and Others v. HAFED Kaithal
The Punjab and Haryana High Court considered whether Section 138 proceedings could be quashed because the cheques were issued as security and parallel criminal and civil-recovery proceedings arose from the same transaction.
Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5285 HC
Chandrashekar Udupi v. Budnar Gaffar Saheb
The Karnataka High Court examined the scope of interference with concurrent findings of conviction and whether an appellate court could impose interest at 18% per annum without a contractual stipulation under Section 80 of the Act.
Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5207 HC
Naresh Kumar v. Anil Kumar
The Himachal Pradesh High Court considered whether an acquittal in a Section 138 complaint could be reversed when the appellate court allegedly misread defence evidence and failed to apply the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139.
Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5268 HC
Case Highlights
Forfeiture of auction deposits: The Supreme Court upheld the forfeiture of an earnest-money deposit and other amounts after an auction bidder failed to pay the balance consideration within the period specified under the IBC liquidation-auction terms.
Daily case-law digest: The newsletter highlights the 28 September 2026 edition of IBC Laws Today, covering developments in insolvency, corporate, banking, RERA and arbitration law.
Legal and Regulatory Updates
New labour codes: A Ministry of Labour and Employment official discussed how the new labour codes are expected to simplify compliance, strengthen employment linkages and expand social-security coverage.
Ashapura Developers v. Ashapura Options Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court considered whether a mortgagor who discharged the lenders’ dues could invoke a provision of the loan agreement as a person claiming through or under the lenders by way of subrogation.
Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5222 HC
Disclaimer: The information provided in this News Bulletin is for informational purposes only. The Learning Centre does not facilitate or provide recordings, additional data, access, or any other related information concerning the events/resources listed.
