9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 858X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urchase properties in her name and for her medical and personal expenditure, borrowed a sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- from the defacto complainant and the said amount was transferred to the petitioner through bank transactions, based on an undertaking that she will repay the money within a period of one year. However, she failed to settle her dues. When it was questioned by the defacto complainant who is the brother of the petitioner's husband, he was dragged from pillar to post. Later, the petitioner has issued a cheque dated 15.05.2017, bearing No.708284, drawn on Punjab National Bank, Bharathi Road, Cuddalore-1 for a sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- in favour of the defacto complainant. When he presented the cheque in the Bank for clearance, it was d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Magistrate II, Cuddalore. 4. Inspite of service of notice as early as on 9.2.2018, till date there is no representation for the respondents. In such a backdrop, this Court is left with no other alternative but to adjudicate the issue on the basis of the materials available on record. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that her husband, who was taking care of her financial transactions, had misused the signed cheque to take revenge on her. It is the case of the petitioner that due to the cruelty meted out to her in her matrimonial home, she left the matrimonial home on 28.3.2017 whereinafter she had filed O.P. No.377/2017 to which the Principal had filed H.M.O.P. No.146 of 2017. The above facts are borne out by record. 6. It is seen fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the petitioner and the Principal are husband and wife and it is only natural for the petitioner to have given blank signed cheques to her husband and further in the light of the matrimonial discord pleaded by the petitioner, this Court cannot brush aside the said stand of the petitioner that the cheque was misused by the Principal. Had really the Principal given the amount to the petitioner, definitely the Principal would have diligently prosecuted the petition before the trial court as well as before this Court. But the Principal has not thought it fit enough to come before this Court and contest the matter. In the absence of the Principal to come before this Court and establish his case, necessary inference has to be drawn in favour o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
