9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charge sheet in C.C. No. 732 of 2017, pending on the file of the learned VII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, George Town, Chennai-1 against the petitioner filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The crux of the complaint is that the accused had issued a cheque for a sum of Rs. 4,80,000/- and also another cheque for Rs. 5,00,000/-. One cheque is for the handing over of the L.I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same has been sought to be quashed. The learned Counsel had also placed reliance on the following judgments: i. V.C. Rangadurai Vs. D. Gopalan & Others reported in CDJ 1978 SC 115 ii. G.F. Hunasikattimath Vs. State of Karnataka reported in CDJ 1990 Kar HC 482 iii. Japahari Vs. Priya reported in 1993 (2) KLT 141 iv. Modicements Vs. Kuchil Kumar reported in 1998 SC 442 v. C. Manohar Vs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be decided and hence, opposed to quash the petition. 5. In the light of the above submission, the main contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that as the accounts are closed in the year 2002 itself, the complaint filed by the defacto complainant is not maintainable. Though, he had placed reliance on some judgments in this regard, the law is well settled in one of the judgment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r there is a legally enforceable debt or not, has to be seen only at the time of trial. Though the legal notice was replied raising disputed question of facts, the same have to be seen only at the time of evidence. The onus is only on drawer of the cheque to dislodge the legal presumption. Though, there may not be any direct evidence to dislodge the presumption, even the circumstances can be broug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
