ANAND BYRAREDDY
Rangaraj Urs – Appellant
Versus
J. T. Muniraju – Respondent
Anand Byrareddy, J.—This is a complainant’s appeal. The complainant had alleged that the respondent had committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (Hereinafter referred to as ‘the NI Act’, for brevity) The complainant was said to be a tenant under the respondent. It is stated that he had paid a security deposit under the lease agreement. This sum of Rs.2.50 lakh was said to have been refunded by the respondent after deducting Rs.8,000/-, by way of a cheque dated 22.2.2007. The cheque having been dishonoured on being presented for collection and when the respondent failed to make payment against a demand made in terms of Section 138 of the NI Act, the complaint came to be filed.
2. In the proceedings before the Magistrate, though the accused had entered appearance, the matter was not contested.
In that, the complainant was not cross-examined to test his evidence by way of his examination-in-chief, nor did the accused tender any evidence in spite of opportunity. The case of the complainant was therefore accepted by the court and the respondent was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.2.45 lakh of which Rs.2.44 lakh was to
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.