TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s cannot be gone into by this court at this stage. Except the factual issues, no other legal ground has been raised by the petitioner. Contention of the petitioner is that the cheque was given as security, when the amount was invested in the share business conducted by the respondent; But later the business ran into loss. Absolutely, there was no binding liability between the parties - HELD THAT:- The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/S. INDUS AIRWAYS PVT. LTD. OTHERS VERSUS M/S. MAGNUM AVIATION PVT. LTD. ANOTHER [ 2014 (4) TMI 464 - SUPREME COURT ] has observed that when there was not existing liability on the date of issue of the cheque, the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act may not be attracted. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trial court with the following allegations:- The petitioner herein is the nephew of the complainant. She obtained a loan amount of Rs.9,50,000/- to meet out her business requirement. The loan amount was obtained on 13/09/2015 and promised to repay the same within two months. On that date itself, she issued a posted dated cheque drawn on Indian Bank, dated 14/09/2017. When it was presented for payment on 14/09/2017, it was returned on 19/09/2017 with an endorsement funds insufficient. After completing the statutory formalities, he filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, which was taken cognizance in STC No.160 of 2018. 3.Seeking quashment of the same, this petition has been filed by the petitioner mainly on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ife lodged a complaint with the Devakottai All Women Police Station. So according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, right from the date of marriage, the relationship between the husband and wife become strained. Subsequently, it also continued with that of the petitioner, who is the sister. 6.The main ground that has been focused by the petitioner in the above petition is the strained relationship. According to the petitioner, absolutely there is no possibility for the petitioner to have borrowed a sum of Rs.9,50,000/-, on 13/09/2015. 7.No doubt, it is a factual issue, which cannot be gone into at this stage and subsequent to that, several cases have been registered between the parties. The cases are Crime Nos.187 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actual aspects cannot be gone into by this court at this stage. Except the factual issues, no other legal ground has been raised by the petitioner. 12.The next contention of the petitioner is that the cheque was given as security, when the amount was invested in the share business conducted by the respondent; But later the business ran into loss. Absolutely, there was no binding liability between the parties. According to her, in the absence of any binding liability, the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be made applicable. For that purpose, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would rely upon the following judgments:- 1.Indus Airways Private Limited and another Vs. Magnum Aviation Priv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
