Supreme Court: Maharashtra moneylenders must show licence in cheque bounce cases

The Court clarified that the previous judgment did not address state-specific money-lending laws and that the issue must be decided by lower courts based on the specific state's statutes.

Who it concerns: Applicant: Vyomesh Mahipatray Shah; Intervenor: Ashok Commercial Enterprises; Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N.V. Anjaria.

What the court decided

• The Court disposed of the Miscellaneous Application seeking clarification.
• The Court held that the judgment dated 26.05.2026 did not deal with the Tamil Nadu or Maharashtra Money-Lending Acts.
• The Court stated that the clarification sought is not required.
• The Court directed that the issue of enforceability under state laws be examined by the concerned Trial Court or superior Courts on their own merits.

Also in the document

• The Court noted that under the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014, an advance at interest against a promissory note is considered a loan and is not excluded from the definition of 'loan' unlike in Tamil Nadu.
• The Court observed that in Maharashtra, an unlicensed money lender must produce a licence at the threshold to satisfy the Court in proceedings for cheque dishonour or recovery.
• The Court referenced a prior order (MA No. 1176/2026) stating that courts should ensure proceedings by unlicensed money lenders are 'nipped in bud' unless a licence is produced or it is shown that money was not advanced at interest.