9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covering letter requesting the bank to credit the cheque amount in his S.B. Account No.40280101000996 and appropriate the said amount towards part payment of loan amount. Neither party produced the said covering letter before this Court. Therefore, whether the petitioner tendered the subject cheque dated 11.04.2012 for ₹ 5000/- along with a covering letter to the respondent/bank with a request as stated supra or not and if so whether by virtue of the said letter the respondent/bank can treat itself as holder in due course of the said cheque and file criminal complaint against the petitioner for dishonour of the cheque are the crucial issues which can be resolved only after a full fledged trial, not at this stage. This Criminal P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... total sum of ₹ 1,23,011/- to the respondent/bank as on 15.05.2012. (a) While so, after making several demands, the respondent issued legal notice dated 05.03.2012. Thereafter, the petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.000592 dated 11.04.2012 for ₹ 5000/- drawn on ICICI Bank, Guntakal towards part payment of the amount due by him. It was a self cheque i.e., the drawee of the cheque was the petitioner himself in the capacity of an authorized signatory of Sri Constructions and the cheque was issued in favour of the petitioner to his S.B. Account No.40280101000996. The petitioner tendered the said cheque along with a covering letter acknowledging his dues in respect of his S.B. Account. The respondent/complainant presented the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und alone, the respondent/bank, who is neither a payee nor the holder in due course of the cheque, can file the complaint against the petitioner against bouncing back of the cheque. Therefore, the complainant has no cause of action in terms of Section 138 of N.I. Act to file the complaint. Without considering the criminal legal aspect, the Trial Court has mechanically registered the complaint and issued summons to the petitioner. He thus, prayed to quash the complaint. 6. In oppugnation, learned counsel for respondent/bank, would submit that the petitioner maintained S.B. Account No. 40280101000996 with the respondent/bank and also availed the Credit Card facility with that account number. In due course of time he fell due of ₹ 1,1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel for respondent. It is no doubt that the subject cheque was issued by the petitioner himself as an authorized signatory of M/s.Sri Constructions in favour of the petitioner himself, of course to his S.B. Account No.40280101000996 and the cheque was not directly issued in favour of the respondent/bank. However, the claim of the respondent/bank is that the subject cheque was tendered by the petitioner along with a covering letter requesting the bank to credit the cheque amount in his S.B. Account No.40280101000996 and appropriate the said amount towards part payment of loan amount. Neither party produced the said covering letter before this Court. Therefore, whether the petitioner tendered the subject cheque dated 11.04.2012 for ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
