N.A. Britto, J.

These are complainant's appeals against the acquittal of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, ('Act' for short). There is no dispute that the accused had issued to the complainant three blank cheques i.e. only signed by the accused with the remaining particulars unfilled by the complainant. The details of the cheques are as follows:-

Cheque No. 867020 dated 20.04.1999 for Rs.50,000/-

(In C.C. No. 175/N/99/A)

Cheque No. 867021 dated 18.02.1999 for Rs.80,000/-

(In C.C. No. 131/N/99/E)

Cheque No. 867022 dated 24.02.1999 for Rs.60,000/-

(In C.C. No. 130/N/99/E)

2. There is no dispute that the complainant is a Civil Engineer and the accused is a Contractor. There is also no dispute that the accused had engaged the complainant as his consultant to appear on his behalf in an Arbitration case which the accused had with Mormugoa Port Trust, in which one P.V. Kandolkar, was the Arbitrator. There is also no dispute that towards the said fees, the accused had paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as part payment. Although the accused also claimed that he had paid another Rs.12,000/- this is disputed by the complainant. There is also no dispute in the said arbitration proceedings, an Award was made in favour of the accused in the sum of Rs.12,25,299/- which amount the accused received on 12.01.1999 and the complainant himself had filed the said Award before the Court at Vasco-da-Gama, as admitted by the complainant, in one of the cases.

3. The complainant filed three separate complaints bearing the aforesaid numbers :

C.C. No. 130/N/99/E and C.C. No. 131/N/99/E were filed on 19.04.1999.

C.C. No. 175/N/99/E. was filed on 20.05.1999.

4. In all the cases, it was the case of the complainant that the accused had issued the said cheques, on the dates mentioned therein, drawn on State Bank of India, towards the payment of dues by the accused to the complainant had then presented the said cheques in his account in Corporation Bank at Aquem, Margoa, on different dates. The cheque for Rs.80,000/- was deposited on 19.02.1999, for Rs.60,000/- on 24.02.1999 and for Rs.50,000/- on 20.04.1999. However, the cheques were returned dishonoured and after the statutory notice was served upon the accused, the receipt of which is not in dispute, the complainant filed the said complaints.

5. In support of the complaint/s, the complainant examined himself and the Bank Manager, where the complainant was having his account and where he had deposited the cheque. The complainant also examined the Bank Manager, where the accused was having his account. Although the complainant had stated in his complaint that the said cheques were issued towards the payment of dues owed by the accused to the complainant, without specifying what were the said dues the complainant in the course of his evidence stated that the complainant had given a loan to the accused and towards the repayment of the said loan, that the cheques were issued by the accused. It was suggested to the complainant, on behalf of the accused, that the said three cheques were given as a security for the payment of the arbitration fees, which the accused would be required to pay to the complainant. It was also suggested to the complainant that the said fees would be 5% of the arbitration Award, when it was stated by the complainant that the accused had agreed to pay 15% of the fees. In support of the said plea, the accused examined himself and also produced the Bank pass book, amongst other documents, to show that he could not have been in need of borrowing any loan from the complainant as he had with him as on 12.01.1999, a sum of Rs.12,16,657/- which was the amount paid to him, due on the Award, after deducting T.D.S.

6. The complainant in his evidence before the Court stated that accused had given the said cheques towards the loans, which was repayable to him and produced the relevant documents. Although the complainant had himself filed the Award, he stated in