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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 893

G. JAYACHANDRAN
Durgadevi – Appellant
Versus
Chandrasekaran – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Parties :M. Velmurugan, M. Govindaraju, Advocates. For the Respondent:V. V. Sairam, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer:Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., pleased to set aside the judgment dated 11.12.2019 passed by the Learned II Additional District Judge, Tindivanam in C.A.No.88 of 2018 and C.C.No.2 of 2018 before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tindivanam.

Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., pleased to set aside the order dated 11.12.2019 passed in C.A.No.90 of 2018 on the file of the Learned II Additional District Judge, Tindivanam, Chennai, partly confirming the sentence imposed in C.C.No.2 of 2018 dated 29.10.2018 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tindivanam and direct to enhance the compensation to Rs.50,00,000/- to the petitioner/complainant.)

Common Order:

1. These two Criminal Revision Cases are filed by the parties to the criminal complaint arising under Section 138 of N.I Act, involving a cheque dated 07/03/2016 for Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) drawn on Indian Bank, P.K.I.E.T Branch, Serumavilangai Nedungadu, Karaikal, issued by Smt.Durgadevi in favour of Chandrasekaran. The subject cheque when presented for collection on 14/03/2016, same was returned for the reason “

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