9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer in the Income Tax Department and is working at Madurai from 07.05.2009 onwards. Between 2002 and 2007, he was working in the Office of the Income Tax Department at Pollachi and thereafter, he was transferred to Ramanathapuram before being posted to Madurai. While he was working at Pollcachi, for the purpose of his banking operations, he opened a Savings Bank Account bearing No.611201505667 with ICICI Bank Limited, Pollachi. On his transfer from Pollcachi, the petitioner for the purpose of closing the bank account contacted the Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Limited, Pollachi and as per the advice of the Branch Manager of the Bank, the ATM card and un-used, un-filled and unsigned cheque leafs were returned by the petitioner through regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner had filed the quash petition. 6.The learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner has no liability towards the respondent and taking advantage of the petitioner's position as a Senior Officer in the Income Tax Department, the Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Limited, Pollachi and the respondent are trying to exploit and extract money from him and there is no whisper of any legal recoverable debt in the complaint and further, continuation of the proceedings before the Lower Court is an abuse of process of law. 7.The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner is liable to pay the debt to the respondent and the cheque in question had been given by the petitioner in discharge of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egotiable Instruments Act, if a delay is explained to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, the same may be condoned. In this case, though, the complaint was filed well within the time, the delay of 147 days has occurred in representing the complaint. Hence, the Trial Court taking the Crl.M.P.No.7229 of 2010 on the file and issuance of notice to the petitioner who is an accused in un-numbered S.T.C.No.......of 2010 cannot be construed as an abuse of process of law. 11.It is seen from the records that the case is pending even without assigning S.T.C. Number from the year 2010, due to the pendency of the above Criminal Original Petition. Under Section 143 to 146 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it could be seen that these amendments hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
