Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (10) TMI 310

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... after referred to as "the N. I. Act"). 2. The summary of the case of the complainant in the trial court is that the complainant-company is engaged in providing logistic services to importers and exporters and also holds stocks of the airway bills for the purpose of exports. In its business transaction, the complainant-company provided airway bill for moving the consignment of accused-company to Mexico and raised an invoice No. 0755/2006-07, dated November 2, 2006 for a sum of Rs. 3,98,615. The accused issued an account payee cheque bearing No. 395599, dated December 4, 2006 for the said sum. The complainant presented the same for encashment through its banker and the said cheque bounced with an endorsement "funds insufficient". The complai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the accused has preferred this revision petition. 4. The sessions court and the trial court records were called for and the same are placed before the court. 5. Considering the continuous non-appearance of learned counsel for the respondent, in the best interest of justice, this court, by its order dated August 13, 2020 appointed learned counsel Sri Javeed (S.) as amicus curiae for the respondent in this matter. 6. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the revision petitioner who made submissions through video conferencing as also of the learned amicus curiae for the respondent who is physically present in the court. 7. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner in his arguments submitted that though he .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ence under section 138 of the N. I. Act. He further submitted that the alleged payment of Rs. 1,00,000 to one Sri Ramesh Kumar by the accused is totally a created story of the accused. As such, the trial court as well the session judge's court have rightly disbelieved the said contention of the accused and held him guilty of the alleged offence. 9. The point that arises for my consideration is, "whether the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the trial court and confirmed by the session judge's court is incorrect and suffers with any illegality or perversity, warranting interference at the hands of this court ?" 10. The finding of the trial court as well the session judge's court regarding the fact that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of Rs. 1,00,000 by the accused to one Sri Ramesh Kumar at the behest of the complainant. 11. The accused in order to show that complainant was due to pay him a sum of Rs. 1,95,019 has produced a copy of the invoice at exhibit D2 which shows different amounts under different headings like ocean freight, inland haulage, terminal handling charges, documentation fee, handling charges, etc., which amount is payable by the complainant to the accused. The complainant in his cross-examination as PW1 has clearly admitted a suggestion made to him by the accused to the said effect. Therefore the accused has shown that though he has issued a cheque to the complainant as per exhibit P1 for a sum of Rs. 3,98,615 still, the complainant in turn owes him .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The other contention of learned counsel for the revision petitioner is that the trial court and the session judge's court have failed to notice that the accused had paid a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 to one Sri Ramesh Kumar at the instance of the complainant, as such, there was no liability of the accused to pay the cheque amount to the complainant. As submitted by the learned amicus curiae for the respondent, the said argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is also not acceptable for the reason that the complainant has not admitted the said contention as true. Further, admittedly, said Sri Ramesh Kumar has not been examined by the accused as his witness. Even though the accused has produced his bank's statement at exhibit D1 showi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates