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

2008 Supreme(Bom) 1484

A.P.LAVANDE
Kedar Kakodkar – Appellant
Versus
Auduth Timblo – Respondent


ADVOCATE APPEARED:
Mr. RAJENDRA PAI with Mr. J. GODINHO, Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr. SUDESH USGAONKAR, Advocate for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT:-

1. Heard Mr. R. Pai, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned Counsel for the respondent. Rule. By consent returnable forthwith.

2. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the criminal proceedings initiated against him by the respondent before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panaji in Criminal Case No.868/0AINI/2005/ A.

3. Briefly the facts relevant for disposal of the present petition, are as under:

The respondent filed above complaint under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act ('The Act' for short) for dishonour of cheque dated 29-03-2005 for Rs.26,13,500/-issued by the petitioner. The respondent filed affidavit in support of the complaint on the basis of which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate issued process against the petitioner under section 138 of the Act. After the process was issued, the plea of the petitioner was recorded, to which the petitioner pleaded not guilty. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned from time to time inter alia for exploring possibility of settlement.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the proceedings initiated against him, are not maintainable primarily on the ground that the learned Mag








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