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

2010 Supreme(Bom) 69

A.P.BHANGALE
Daulatrao Yashwantrao Patil – Appellant
Versus
Subhash Babarao Mankar – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant:Shantaram More, Advocate. For the Respondent:

Judgment :

Oral Judgment:

1. Heard learned counsel for appellant. Mr Mahesh Rai, learned counsel appearing for respondent on delay condonation application is also present before the Court. Even though he is personally present before the Court, he is insisting on the Court to issue notice to respondent and regrets his inability to argue the matter. Since the controversy is in narrow campass and legal position is settled on the issue involved, notice to respondent is dispensed with.

2. Leave to appeal granted. Admit. R & P dispensed with. Matter is taken up forthwith

for final disposal. Heard learned counsel for appellant.

3. When the criminal complaint case filed by appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was fixed for evidence on 6.2.2009, complainant was absent and, therefore, learned 4th Judicial Magistrate, FC, Amravati dismissed the complaint and acquitted respondent/accused.

4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant advanced substantial amount by way of hand loan to accused out of the amount of consideration received by appellant after sale of his house in 1999. He submits that respondent who is close relation of appellant had issued chequ




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