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

2013 Supreme(Mad) 632

B.RAJENDRAN
P. Raju – Appellant
Versus
U. Ram Babu – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:A.A. Lawrence, Advocate.
For the Respondent:P. Kumaresan for C.V. Kumar, Advocates.

Judgment :-

1. The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused in unnumbered C.C. No. 2010 filed by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, has come forward with this Criminal Revision Case challenging the order dated 02.06.2011 passed in M.P. No. 1642 of 2010 by the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, by which the petition filed by the respondent, for condoning the delay of 67 days in filing the complaint, was allowed.

2. According to the respondent, he entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the petitioner on 24.12.2007 for negotiating the sale of lands with prospective buyers. As per the Memorandum of Understanding, the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.90,00,000/-by way of cheque to the respondent and agreed to complete the terms of the agreement within 150 days from the date of signing the Memorandum of Understanding. Since the petitioner could not fulfill the terms of the agreement dated 24.12.2007, another agreement came to be entered into on 08.08.2008 which provides for return of the advance amount of Rs.90,00,000/- together with liquidated damages of Rs.35,00,000/-. As per the agreement dated 08.08.2008, the petitioner issued thre




















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