TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without any force, compulsion, duress, undue influence or threat. The complainant also stated that he has no objection if the applicant/revisionist is acquitted in the light of compromise in question. However, the Registrar (Judicial-II) has pointed out that in view of decisions in the case of Damodardas S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H, [ 2010 (5) TMI 380 - SUPREME COURT ] and M.P. State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain and others, [ 2014 (10) TMI 528 - SUPREME COURT ] the applicant/revisionist is required to deposit 15% of the cheque amount as costs with the State Legal Servics Authority - it is directed subject to applicant's depositing compounding fee of 15% of cheque amount (₹ 1,50,000/-) i.e. ₹ 22,500/- b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is of familarity the complainant gave the aforesaid amount to wife of applicant/accused as loan. When the complainant made demand for repayment of loan amount, the applicant/accused gave cheque bearing No.363407 dated 06.11.2015 of Central Bank of India amounting to ₹ 1,50,000/- with an assurance that if complainant lodges the said cheque, it will be honourned. 3. The respondent/complainant lodged the aforesaid cheque with his banker on 30.11.2015. However, the same was dishonoured on 01.12.2015 with an endorsement Insufficient balance . Thereafter, the respondent/complaint sent notice dated 15.12.2015, but the applicant/accused neither repaid the loan amount nor gave reply to notice. Hence, the respondent/complainant filed compla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... criminal appeal before the lower appellate Court the applicant had deposited ₹ 50,125/- vide Document-A/1 and balance amount of ₹ 150,500/- has been paid by the son of the applicant to the complainant on 05.3.2022 and acknowledgement receipt has been brought on record as Document-A/2. 7. On 10.3.2022 the learned counsel for the parties have made joint submission before this Court that parties have amicably entered into compromise and, therefore, they were directed to personally appear before the Registrar (Judicial-II) for verification of their compromise. In compliance of order of this Court though the applicant/revisionist did appear in person as he was in jail, however, his counsel Shri Arpan Shrivastava appeared before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
