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

2012 Supreme(Mad) 3056

A.ARUMUGHASWAMY
K. Vairavan – Appellant
Versus
Selvaraj – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Kadarkari, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.

JUDGMENT

1. The Criminal Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused against the order dated 06.06.2012 made in Crl.M.P.No.3397 of 2012 in S.T.C.No.672 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Periyakulam.

2. Thefacts of the case are that the petitioner is the accused and the respondent is the complainant in the case. The respondent alleges that the petitioner has committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. According to the petitioner, the cheque in question was not signed and issued by him to the respondent. It is his further contention that there was neither legally enforceable debt nor liability on the part of the petitioner impelling him to issue the cheque in question.

3. During trial of the case, the petitioner made an application to the learned Magistrate to forward the cheque in question for opinion from a handwriting expert. Accordingly, the learned Magistrate forwarded the admitted signatures of the petitioner along with the disputed cheque for the purpose of comparison by an expert. On such comparison, the expert gave opinion that the disputed signature on the cheque would have been made by the petitioner. Th













































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