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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3643

D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
C. Balu @ Chinnasamy – Appellant
Versus
N. Saravanan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants:M. Muruganantham, Advocate. For the Respondents:M. Guruprasad, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

(Common Prayer: Criminal Appeals are filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the Judgment of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri in C.A.No.18 of 2017, C.A.No.19 pf 2017, and C.A.No.17 of 2017, dated 12.02.2020 respectively, in reversing the well-considered Judgment of the learned Magistrate FTC, Dharmapuri in STC No.31 of 2014, STC.No.14 of 2014, and STC.No.22 of 2015, dated 26.04.2017, respectively, in any event is illegal, incompetent, without jurisdiction and liable to set aside in-limina.)

Common Judgment

1. These three appeals arise out of acquittal for the alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, between the same parties, Judgments being delivered simultaneously, on the same date, and for the same reasons, are taken up together and disposed of by this common Judgment.

2. The case of the complainant is that the complainant is a person doing real estate and also lending monies for interest and is also a contractor. The accused is also a person who is a PWD contractor and also doing real estate business purchasing land and promoting them as residential plots and selling them. Therefore, the ac

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