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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 882

R.MALA
T. Palanisamy – Appellant
Versus
P. C. Ramasamy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Kumaraswamy
For the Respondent: Mr. M. Guruprasad

ORDER :

The petitioner has come forward with the present petition to set aside the impugned order passed in C.M.P. No. 2013 of 2013 dated 03.06.2013 passed by the learned Fast Track Judicial Magistrate No.I, Erode.

2. The petitioner, who is the complainant in S.T.C. No. 233 of 2012 has filed an application to recall P.W.1 and against the dismissal of the same the present petition has been preferred. The petitioner herein filed a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the basis of the cheque issued by the respondent dated 27.12.2007, which was presented in the bank for encashment and returned as insufficient fund and after issuance of statutory notice, the present complaint has been preferred. After both side evidence was over, when the case was posted for arguments, the petitioner herein has filed the application under section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall P.W.1 stating that D.W.1 to D.W.3 were examined to disprove that the petitioner has means to lend such a huge amount. For rebutting the same, recall of P.W.1 just and necessary and that factum was not considered by the trial Court. Hence, to set aside the impugned order passed by the trial Court, the petitioner ha








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