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

2021 (11) TMI 544

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... II, Ernakulam was reversed. 2. The appellant herein was the complainant in C.C.No.1107/1999. According to the appellant/complainant, the 2nd respondent/accused herein had availed a hire purchase loan from the appellant/complainant and that he had committed default in repayment of instalments due under the hire purchase agreement. According to the appellant/complainant, the 2nd respondent/accused had repaid only one instalment of the loan and on 20.11.1998 he had issued Ext.P2 cheque for a sum of Rs. 1,21,000/- which was the total amount to be repaid under the hire purchase agreement. The trial court after considering the evidence let in come to the conclusion that the 2nd respondent/accused herein had committed the offence punishable under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ference in the signatures contained in Ext.P2, Ext.D1 account opening form and Ext.P6 acknowledgment card relating to the statutory notice issued by the appellant/complainant. The trial court also found that the 2nd respondent/ accused had no case that the appellant/complainant had obtained the cheque from him by unlawful means and had fabricated his signature and handwritting and that no reply was sent by the 2nd respondent/accused to the statutory notice issued by the appellant/complainant. 5. The trial court, therefore, was of the view that the appellant/complainant was entitled to the benefit of the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and therefore found that Ext.P2 cheque had been issued for disch .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ifferent from the signature contained in Ext.P2 cheque. By invoking the power under Section 73 of the Evidence Act, the court reached the conclusion that on a comparison of the signatures in Ext.P2 cheque, Ext.P8 hire purchase agreement, Ext.X1(a) extract of the registration particulars of the vehicle purchased with the hire purchase loan, the signatures on the postal acknowledgment card (Ext.P6), Ext.D1 account opening form, vakalath of the 2nd respondent/accused and in the statement recorded by the trial court under Section 313 Cr.P.C, the name of the 2nd respondent/accused is decipherable from the signatures in Exts.P2, P8 and X1(a), whereas in other documents, the signature is only a cluster of bent lines scribbled with English alphabet .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e court had found that the signature in the cheque is similar to the one in Ext.X1(a), there was no reason to disbelieve the version of the appellant/complainant that the cheque had been issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt especially when taking of the loan and the failure to repay had not been disputed. In Abbas Haji M. v. T.N.Channakeshava (2019(5) KHC 20), it was held:- "4. The case set up by the complainant was that the original appellant had borrowed a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs from him and for repayment of that sum had issued a cheque on 18/11/2000 drawn on State Bank of Mysore. On presentation, the cheque was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds. Thereafter, legal notice (Ext.P4) was issued, which has been duly served up .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he limits which Appellate Court is bound by criminal cases setting aside an order of acquittal. Proceedings under S.138 of the Act are quasi - criminal proceedings. The principles, which apply to acquittal in other criminal cases, cannot apply to these cases. As far as the present case is concerned, in addition to three reasons, given by the High Court, we are of the view that the original appellant has not even explained how the leaves of the cheque entered into the hands of the complainant. It is urged that in cross -examination of the complainant some suggestions were made that since the complainant was visiting the office of the original appellant, he had access to the same. The complainant had only admitted that he visited the office o .....

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