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

2006 Supreme(Bom) 2031

M.G.GAIKWAD
Jankilal Daulatrao Kasliwal – Appellant
Versus
Sandeep Pandharinath – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Heard learned advocates for respective parties.

2. By this application, applicant-original complainant seeks leave to prefer appeal against acquittal.

3. This applicant had filed complaint alleging offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. According to complainant the complainant carries on business. The accused from to time from 2000 purchased goods on credit and for the outstanding dues of Rs.1,95,370/- accused issued cheque No.17352. Lateron this cheque came to be dishonoured. Hence demand notice was issued but claim not being satisfied, complaint alleging offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act came to be filed.

4. The complainant in support of his case examined himself and placed reliance on the cheque and notice. Since beginning by giving notice reply the accused put forth defence that he had no transaction at all with the complainant and he had issued this cheque alongwith five other cheques to the son of the complainant and one of the cheques is being misused by present complainant. At the trial the complainant admitted that he is having no documentary evidence to show that he had transaction with the accused or to show that dues are o



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