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

2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 9687

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI, J
M/S MOKSH AGARBATTI CO., – Appellant
Versus
M/S SRI BASAVESHWARA TRADERS – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI. S G BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE; SRI. MEGHACHANDRA D N, ADVOCATE; SRI. KHETAN BANGERA, ADVOCATE

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The cheques issued as security are held to be covered under Section 138 NI Act and can be presented for realization when debt exists (!) (!) . - The presumption under Section 139 NI Act operates in favor of the complainant and shifts to the accused to rebut it; burden then shifts to the complainant if rebuttal occurs (!) [p_21.1] (!) . - The judgment sets aside acquittal, convicts under Section 138 NI Act, and imposes a fine of Rs.15,00,000 with default imprisonment of six months; directs entire fine to be paid as compensation to the complainant (!) (!) .

What is the enforceability of cheques issued as security under Section 138 NI Act?

What are the circumstances under which the presumption under Section 139 NI Act operates and how must the accused rebut it?

What is the appropriate quantum of punishment and compensation when a conviction under Section 138 NI Act is recorded?


JUDGEMENT

This is complainant’s appeal filed under Section 378 (4) of Cr.P.C , challenging the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial Court, dismissing the complaint filed by the complainant and thereby acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

3. It is the case of complainant that it is a commercial establishment i.e., a partnership Firm engaged in manufacture of Moksha Agarbatti. Accused is the Proprietor and authorised signatory, carrying on business in the name and style of M/s Shri Basaveshwara Traders.

Accused has purchased Agarbattis from the complainant from 21.06.2002 to 21.01.2010 under numerous delivery notes-cum-commercial credit tax invoices with the terms and conditions, on credit basis. In pursuance to the orders placed by the accused, the payments were supposed to be made within the stipulated period, as per the terms and conditions. The details of purchase made by the accused are depicted in the Table-I and II.

4. In pursuance to the transactions, accused provided 4 cheques as a security with a condition that the complainant can

              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