The main legal point established in the judgment is the consequences of making false statements on oath and the distinct and new liability arising under the Negotiable Instruments Act when payment is made by a cheque.

JUDGMENT :

ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.

1. The Plaintiff has filed the captioned Summary Suit seeking a decree against the Defendants for an amount of Rs.1,70,93,880/- as more particularly set out in the particulars of claim annexed as Exhibit-6 to the Plaint. The Suit is based on the dishonour of 6 cheques, all dated 31st December 2019 (the said cheques) issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff. The details of the said 6 cheques are as follows:

2. The facts in the present case lie within a very narrow compass. It is the Plaintiff’s case that, in the year 2018, Defendant Nos.2 and 3 had approached the Plaintiff with a request for financial help for funding the Defendants’ construction business. The Plaintiff considering the request of Defendant Nos.2 and 3, had extended financial assistance to Defendant No. 1 to the tune of Rs.1,20,64,000/-. Subsequently, it is the Plaintiff’s case that the Defendants had agreed to repay the amount advanced along with compensation as more particularly set out in the letter dated 10th October, 2019. The said cheques were sent to the Plaintiff by the Defendants along with this letter.

3. However, when the said cheques were presented for clearance on 27th March, 2020, they were all returned dishonored with the caption “Insufficient Funds.” The Plaintiff thereafter vide their advocate’s notice dated 9th July, 2020, called upon the Defendants to make payment of the amounts mentioned in the said cheques. However, despite due receipt of the advocate’s notice, the Defendants failed and neglected to either respond to the same or make payment in terms of the work in respect of which the said cheques were drawn.

4. It is thus that the present Summary Suit came to be filed.

Submissions of Mr. Thorat, on behalf of the Plaintiff.

5. Mr. Thorat learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff at the outset invited my attention to the letter dated 10th October, 2019 and pointed out that the Defendants had unequivocally admitted and acknowledged receipt of an amount of Rs.1,20,64,000/- from the Plaintiff. He then pointed out that the Defendants had, by the said letter, agreed to repay the said amount to the Plaintiff alongwith compensation. He submitted that it was thus and in keeping with the said agreement arrived at between the parties that the said cheques had been issued by Defendant No. 1 to the Plaintiff for the total amount of Rs.1,47,64,000/-.

6. From the said letter, learned counsel pointed out the details of the said cheques were set out in Annexure A thereto and that the said letter in respect of Annexure A specifically recorded as follows:

“(i) Repayment of loan Annexure A.

(ii) Repayment of investment now considered as current liabilities Annexure A.”

He thus submitted that the consideration for which the said cheques had been issued had already been clearly set out in the said letter. Learned counsel then pointed out that the Defendants had at no time prior to the filing of the Reply to the Summons for Judgment, ever disputed and/or denied their liability to make payment of the said amounts advanced. He pointed out that the Defendants had also not replied to the Plaintiff’s advocate’s notice dated 9th July, 2