9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ummary proceedings, for the simple reason that when the loan was taken, the petitioner supposed to have mortgaged the property to the bank by depositing the title deeds and thus, the bank had adopted its normal procedure and so judicial notice of the same can be taken. There is no relevance of witness to be examined when proceedings are based upon the Negotiable Instruments, as the petitioner has himself admitted that cheques were signed/issued by him and the consideration is also there for loan amount - Further, it is clear from the action of the respondents that he wanted to delay the proceedings by one way or the other, as one after the another, he kept on moving different applications when the case was at the final stage. Petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e parties and have gone through the records in detail. 4. Mr. Sanjeev Kuthiala, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Anaida Kuthiala, Advocate, has vehemently argued that the power vested in the learned Court below under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is not exercised by it and failure to do so require this Court to pass appropriate order in the case, as the learned Court below in its order dated 10.06.2022 had to only pass an order as per law. He has further argued that the petitioner has been cheated by the bank, as the bank had taken 12 blank cheques from him and had promised him that the loan will be re-scheduled and he will be given loan of Rs. 25 crores and earlier amount will be adjusted in the future loan. However, the bank tried to rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was allowed and thereafter he examined himself, and under Section 408 Cr.P.C. for transferring the cases from one Court to another Court, which was dismissed by the learned Session Judge, vide detailed order, dated 25.06.2022. He has further argued that instant is a summary proceedings and the applications are being moved by the petitioner just to delay the proceedings. 6. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that arguments advanced by the respondent are without records and present petition deserves to be allowed. 7. It is clear from the records that initially the petitioner moved an application under Section 315 Cr.P.C., which was allowed and subsequently he moved another application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure and so judicial notice of the same can be taken. 10. At the same point of time, there is no relevance of witness to be examined when proceedings are based upon the Negotiable Instruments, as the petitioner has himself admitted that cheques were signed/issued by him and the consideration is also there for loan amount. In these circumstances, this Court finds that law, as cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable to the facts of the present case. Further, it is clear from the action of the respondents that he wanted to delay the proceedings by one way or the other, as one after the another, he kept on moving different applications when the case was at the final stage. 11. Accordingly, in view of the discussio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
