9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 991X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t at the rate of 12% per annum. The respondent issued a cheque bearing No.750461 for Rs. 75,000/- dated 12.12.2007 drawn on the ING Vysya Bank Limited, Salem Branch. While issuing the cheque, the respondent promised that it would be honoured as and when the same is presented for collection. But when the appellant presented the cheque on 12.12.2007 through his bankers, the Karur Vysya Bank, Karipatty Branch, it was dishonoured on the ground of "insufficient of funds". Therefore, the appellant approached the respondent and asked him about the return of the cheque, the respondent claimed some excuses and requested the appellant to represent the cheque for payment on 16.01.2008 and assured that this time the cheque would be honoured. But that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct and Sessions Judge, Salem, which came to be allowed under judgment dated 19.02.2010. There against, the present appeal has been filed. 4. The main case of the appellant is that the appellant has proved the case that the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs. 75,000/- from the appellant and issued the cheque and on presentation, the subject cheque was returned. The trial Court rightly found that the respondent committed an offence but whereas in the first appeal, the appellate Court failed to consider the fact that the respondent admittedly has not denied the signature. Therefore, he filed the present appeal. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the respondent denied the very means of the appellant itself. From the def ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding and payable by the respondent herein to Sureshkumar in the sale price of the lorry. Agreeing for the same, the respondent obtained fitness certificate for the lorry all by himself and in the said procedure he spent Rs. 20,000/- and therefore deducting Rs. 20,000/- from the balance amount of Rs. 35,000/- he was due and payable to an extent of Rs. 15,000/- only to the sellers. So, he approached Sureshkumar with the sum of Rs. 15,000/-. He opted to pay Rs. 15,000/- and get back the blank cheques and pronotes from them. But they in turn for returning the blank cheques and pronotes demanded Rs. 63,000/- from the respondent, told him that only if the respondent pay Rs. 63,000/- they would return the blank cheques and pronotes. The respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
