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

ARUNA JAGADEESAN
N. Hentry – Appellant
Versus
P. Natarajan – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:P. Prabhakaran, Advocate.
For the Respondent:S. Jayakumar, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Aruna Jagadeesan, J.— This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kuzhithurai dated 23.1.2013 in CC No. 149 of 2005 dismissing the petition filed under Section 254(2) of Cr.P.C.

The complaint is filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner. The complainant’s case is that on 6.8.2004, the petitioner/accused borrowed a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs from the complainant at the complainant’s residence to discharge a debt and on the same day, the accused issued a cheque bearing No. 652791 dated 6.12.2004 for a sum of Rs. 2lakhs drawn at State Bank of India, Karungal Branch. The cheque was presented on 6.1.2005 for collection in Tamil Nadu Merchantile Bank at Pallihadi and the same was dishonoured on the ground that insufficient fund. Thereafter, on 1.2.2005, the complainant issued a statutory notice to which the accused sent a reply disputing all the averments stated in the notice. The complainant examined himself as PW1. Thereafter, the accused wanted to examine defence witnesses and he submitted a list of defence witnesses and filed a petition under Section 254(2) of Cr.P.C praying to the Court to issue summo




















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