B.A.PATIL
Revanappa – Appellant
Versus
Narasingha Naik – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B. A. PATIL, J.
1. The petitioner/accused has preferred the present revision petition being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga, in Criminal Appeal No.910/2011 dated 3.10.2015 whereunder the judgment of Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Shikaripura in C.C.No.96/2008 dated 18.11.2011 was confirmed.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the respondent. Though several adjournments have been made, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner/accused. As the petition cannot be dismissed for default, it has to be heard and decided on merits and as such the case was taken on merits and disposed of by this order.
3. The case of the complainant in brief is that complainant and accused were familiar with each other and accused was in need of money and requested him to give Rs.50,000/-. Accordingly, complainant advanced Rs.50,000/- on 27.08.2007 and in order to discharge the said amount a cheque bearing No.457545 dated 2.9.2007 was issued for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and when the said cheque was presented through the banker of the complainant, it was returned with a Shara 'Funds Insufficient' and 'stop payment of the draw
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.