R.BASANT
Anil Ravindran – Appellant
Versus
A. Rama Pai – Respondent
R. Basant, J.
1. The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The cheque is for an amount of Rs.50,000/- and is shown to be dated 31/12/1999. Notice of demand though duly received was not replied to by the accused. Accused, in the course of the trial, has taken up a contention that the date 31/12/1999 is an alteration / forgery and that when the cheque was handed over, it bore the date 31/12/1997. The last digit 7 has now been altered to 9. This is the crucial contention raised. According to the petitioner, in 1997 when there was a transaction of Rs.30,000/-, two cheques one for Rs.30,000/- and another for Rs.50,000/- were obtained from the petitioner by the complainant who is a money lender and he had kept the same with him. In respect of the cheque for Rs.30,000/-, Annexure B notice was issued. Annexure C cheque was issued along with the original of Annexure D reply notice by the petitioner himself directly to the advocate.
2. The complainant denied these allegations. Earlier transactions were not disputed. But it was contended that the cheque evidences a liability to repay an amount of Rs.50,000/- and it always bore the date
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.