9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 979X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... specifically asked on behalf of the defence to P.W. 1 through his cross-examination as to whether he had documents in support of his claim that ₹ 3,45,781/- was issued from the accused. The witness replied to the said question in the affirmative - The learned Magistrate also did not consider the legality, validity, sufficiency and service of demand notice issued by the complainant before the filing of the case. This Court is of the view that the learned Magistrate failed to consider the basic tenets of control of cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the learned Magistrate should undergo a training in the State Judicial Academy on the control of cases under Negotiable Instruments Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her lawful debt and liability, the respondent No. 2 issued three cheques, all dated 1st February, 2009 amounting to ₹ 1,45,781/-, ₹ 1,00,000/- and ₹ 1,00,000/- respectively, total being ₹ 3,45,781/-. The said cheques were drawn on Central Bank of India, Belgachia Branch. The cheque of ₹ 1,45,781/- was issued in the name of M/s. Hindustan Sanitary Stores and other two cheques were issued in the name of Hira Lal Gupta, one of the partners of said partnership business. The complainant deposited the said cheques with his banker for encashment but all the said three cheques were dishonoured on the ground that the respondent had closed the account on which the cheques were issued. Subsequently, within the statutory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is found that no suggestion was even put to the P.W. 1 to the effect that the cheques in question were issued by the respondent No. 2 as security deposit. On the contrary, it is specifically asked on behalf of the defence to P.W. 1 through his cross-examination as to whether he had documents in support of his claim that ₹ 3,45,781/- was issued from the accused. The witness replied to the said question in the affirmative. Learned Magistrate did not even consider that Section 139 of the N.I. Act enacts that unless contrary is proved, the Court shall presume that the holder of the cheque received the cheque in discharge, in the whole or in part, by any debt or other liability. The presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the basic tenets of control of cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the learned Magistrate should undergo a training in the State Judicial Academy on the control of cases under Negotiable Instruments Act . A copy of this judgment be placed before the learned Registrar General who is also the learned Director of the West Bengal Judicial Academy requesting her to arrange for a training on the control of cases under Negotiable Instruments Act of the Metropolitan Magistrates and Judicial Magistrates, First Class and the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta be included as a trainee officer in the Academy. For the reasons stated above and in view of the fact that the lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
