9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981 (for short 'the Act'), is assailed in this Appeal. 2. Respondent No. 1 (original accused No. 1) is a proprietary firm of which respondent No. 2 (original accused No. 2) is the proprietor. The Appellant (original complainant) is also a proprietary firm that supplies dairy equipment. The accused/respondent No. 2 placed a purchase order with the appellant/complainant firm for a complete set of dairy equipment required for milk products, with a total cost of Rs. 10,25,000/-with the condition that 90% of the total amount was required to be paid by the accused at the time of taking out equipment from the manufacturing plant of the complai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilas Landge (PW2), Manager of Janaseva Bank. A number of documents were also tendered on behalf of the complainant. The statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. came to be recorded. The accused, in his defence, examined a witness, Atmaram Soundalgikar (DW 1), who signed the agreement executed between the complainant and the accused as a witness. He relied on the agreement (Exh.64) executed between the complainant and the accused. 6. After appraisal of the evidence and the documents tendered for his perusal, the learned Magistrate was persuaded to acquit the accused. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal, the complainant has preferred this Appeal. 7. I have heard the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n his cross-examination, it is clear that they agreed to the terms that the complainant should provide machinery as per the quotation (Exh.38). In the quotation, there is no condition to show that the 90% amount is to be paid while dispatching the machinery. 11. According to DW 1, Atmaram Yashwant Sawdalgikar, the remaining amount of Rs. 2,85,000/-was to be paid after the installation of machinery. However, as of now, the machinery has not been installed. His evidence established that he was a witness to the transaction between the complainant and the accused and that Rs. 2,85,000/-was only due to the accused. 12. The proforma invoice (Exh.42) also indicates that the total amount is Rs. 10,25,000/-. Although there is a sales tax column in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
