Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2022 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 979 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURTDishonor of Cheque - discharge of legally enforceable debt or not - rebuttal of accused - control of cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the lower Court record it is found that the complainant produced the challans and invoices issued in the name of M/s. Sangeeta Construction which were marked as exhibit-2 collectively. On perusal of the cross-examination of the complainant who deposed during trial as P.W. 1. It is found that no suggestion was even put to the P.W. 1 to the effect that the cheques in question were issued by the respondent No. 2 as security deposit. On the contrary, it is specifically asked on behalf of the defence to P.W. 1 through his cross-examination as to whether he had documents in support of his claim that ₹ 3,45,781/- was issued from the accused. The witness replied to the said question in the affirmative - The learned Magistrate also did not consider the legality, validity, sufficiency and service of demand notice issued by the complainant before the filing of the case. This Court is of the view that the learned Magistrate failed to consider the basic tenets of control of cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the learned Magistrate should undergo a training in the State Judicial Academy on the control of cases under Negotiable Instruments Act. In view of the fact that the learned Magistrate did not discuss the validity and service of demand notice in the impugned judgment, while setting aside the judgment, this Court is of the view that the complaint case should be remitted back to the trial Court for delivery of judgment within one month from the date of receipt of the lower Court record and communication of the judgment passed by this Court. Appeal allowed.
|