Court clears accused in dud cheques case

ABU DHABI — The Supreme Federal Court has annulled a ruling of the Court of Appeal clearing a company agent of the charges of issuing dud cheques to cover the cost of agricultural inputs he had purchased from a fertiliser company.

By Wael Yousef

  • Follow us on
  • google-news
  • whatsapp
  • telegram

Published: Fri 30 Dec 2005, 11:03 AM

Last updated: Thu 2 Apr 2015, 7:26 PM

According to the case history, Abu Dhabi Fertiliser Industry filed a case before the Shariah Court of Al Ain against Al Abrar Agricultural Establishment (formerly known as Al Qsa Agricultural Establishment), whose manager Ahmed M. bought agricultural material worth Dh198, 405 from the former.

Ahmed paid part of the amount and had to pay the balance of Dh114,000, for which the manager issued three cheques, all of which bounced for lack of sufficient funds.

The Shariah Court of Al Ain ordered Al Abrar Agricultural Establishment (and the Al Qsa Agricultural Establishment) to pay Dh114,000 to Abu Dhabi Fertiliser Industry.

Al Abrar Agricultural Establishment and Ahmed appealed against the verdict at the Shariah Appeal Court of Al Ain, which annulled the verdict and returned the case to the Court of First Instance.

The Court of First Instance issued its verdict ordering the manager as agent of Al Abrar Agricultural Establishment and the Al Qsa Agricultural Establishment to pay Dh114, to the complainant.

The manager appealed again before the Shariah Appeal Court of Al Ain, which rejected the appealed ruling. Abu Dhabi Fertiliser Industry appealed the verdict at the apex court, demanding a scrutiny of the documents, bills and cheques signed by the manager of Al Abrar Agricultural Establishment after receiving the material throughout his dealings with the Abu Dhabi Fertiliser Industry which thought that he was the owner of Al Abrar Agricultural Establishment, and received from him cheques issued on his personal bank account. All those cheque bounced for lack of insufficient funds. The apex court ordered the case to be reviewed by the Court of Appeal.

More news from