SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Bom) 559

A.H.JOSHI
MAMATADEVI PRAFULLAKUMAR BHANSALI – Appellant
Versus
PUSHPADEVI KAILASHKUMAR AGRAWAI – Respondent


Judgment

( 1 ) THE facts in brief can be stated as follows :- according to the complainant, she had advanced a loan of Rs. 5 lackhs to accused. The accused person failed to repay the loan and ultimately the accused delivered to the complainant a cheque of Rs. 2,50,000/- dated 24-10-2001 bearing No. 1979158 drawn on Khamgaon Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. , khamgaon, Branch Paratwada, towards the repayment of the loan with an assurance that the cheque shall be honoured positively. The cheque was dishonoured when deposited with Banks remark "fund insufficient in the account of the accused". On 16-11-2001 complainant issued notice by Registered Post as well as by Under Certificate of Posting on 16-11-2001 on the original address of the accused. The notice served by the UCP was received by the accused, however, the Registered A. D. envelop was received wiith Post Office remark "do not claimed". According to the complainant, despite knowledge of liabilities, the accused did not make the payment. Complainant treated it as deemed service of notice, therefore, filed a private complaint.

( 2 ) THE Complainant Pushpa w/o Kailashkumar Agrawal filed a complaint in her own name representing hersel














































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top