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

2006 Supreme(Ori) 145

P.K.TRIPATHY
ABHIMANYU ROUT – Appellant
Versus
PREMRAJ AGARWALA – Respondent


P. K. TRIPATHY, J.

( 1 ) HEARD further argument and on consent of the parties the CRLMC is disposed of at the stage of admission in the following manner.

( 2 ) PETITIONER is the accused in I. C. C. No. 121 of 2003 of the Court of S. D. J. M. , Dhenkanal. Cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'n. I. Act') has been taken against him on the basis of the allegation that on 23/3/1999 accused-petitioner, under a credit memo, purchased six number of Apollo Tyres along with tubes and flaps from the complainant-opposite party and did not pay the amount, but on 1/6/2003 acknowledged that dues in a paper affixed with revenue stamp. Thereafter on 9/3/2003 accused intended to repay that debt and accordingly issued a cheque, which bounced. In spite of due intimation as provided in Section 138 of the N. I. Act, when payment of the debts/dues was not made by the accused, after expiry of the statutory period complainant-opposite party instituted the aforesaid I. C. C. Case and after recording the statement of the complainant, learned S. D. J. M. , Dhenkanal passed the order of cognizance and issued process against the accused-petitioner.

(

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