9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Magistrate, 2nd Court, Alipore in Complaint Case No. C.6005/2002 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned Magistrate had convicted the present petitioner and sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment of 10 days and to pay compensation of Rs,55,000/- to the complainant in default to suffer simple imprisonment of three months. Facts giving rise to the present Revisional Application may be summarized as under:- Opposite party initiated a complaint case being Complaint Case No.6005 of 2002 against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the allegations that the petitioner took friendly loan from the opposite party and undertook to repay the same in terms of the agreement dated 13.03.2001 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said judgment and order passed by the Learned Judge in appeal is under challenge. Opposite party/complainant did not turn up despite receipt of notice. During the course of argument Learned Counsel for the petitioner has forcefully submitted that the cheques in question were not issued by the petitioners in discharge of his liability. According to his contention the complainant/opposite party has failed to discharge his burden by cogent and sufficient evidence that the complainant had required fund to give loan to the accused/petitioner. Learned Counsel has further contended that the cheques in question were issued on condition that the complainant would provide advice as a business consultant but the complainant did not render advice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e complainant was required to give as per the agreement between the parties. He has contended that service was never rendered by the complainant and as such it cannot be said that the cheques were issued in discharge of liability. In this connection Learned Counsel has cited the decisions of Vijan Vs. Laxman & Anr. and Reverend Mother Marykutty Vs. Reni C Kotta Ram & Anr (Supra) and contended that the petitioner rebutted the presumption under Section 118 of the Act. As per Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act there is presumption that every negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration until the contrary is proved. The Negotiable Instruments Act contains two separate provisions viz 118 (a) and under Section 138 for ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in the present case. A plea has been raised by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that the complaint was time barred. It appears that similar plea was taken by the petitioner before the Learned Appellant Court. After considering the materials on record the Learned Judge observed that there was prolonged cease work called by Bar Council of West Bengal and as such the complainant could not file the petition of complaint within the period of limitation. The complainant filed the petition of complaint as soon as the cease work was called off. Learned Judge also observed that the fact of cease work observed by the members of the Bar was not disputed by defence. I do not find any reason to interfere with the observation made by the Learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
