9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 622X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... G.PADMARAJ JUDGMENT Appellant is the complainant in C.C.No.1137/2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kolencherry. He filed a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against accused 1 to 3 before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate by the impugned judgment dated October 4, 2008 dismissed the complaint and acquitted them. The complainant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or want of sufficiency of funds in the account of the accused in the bank. In spite of notice Ext.P3, they did not repay the amount. Therefore, the complainant filed the complaint before the lower court under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against accused 1 to 3. 3. The learned Magistrate, on receipt of the complaint, recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and took cogniza ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the lower court. His evidence is supported by Exts.P1 to P7. The specific case of the 2nd accused as testified by him as DW1 was that PW1 was the Manager of the Parur Kuries, that he subscribed to a kuri conducted by the complainant and while accepting the auctioned amount, he gave two signed blank cheques as security to the kuri company, that the said kuri company has been closed in 1995 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, it is seen from Ext.P6 ledger extract of account that the accused had closed the account during 1993 itself. Therefore, it is highly improbable that he would have issued Ext.P1 which is dated November 19, 2002. Ext.P6 also shows that the cheques bearing serial numbers beginning 249 were encashed in 1993. PW2 the Bank Manager had also admitted the said fact in cross- examination. 9. For all the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
