Back
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
J.M.KHAZI, J
SRI. PRAKASH CHAND B S/O LATE BUDHMAL – Appellant
Versus
SRI. MANOHAR SINGH S/O LATE RANJIT SINGH – Respondent
प्रतिवादी का आरोप है कि उसने बैंक प्रबंधक के साथ साजिश रचकर एक झूठा समर्थन पत्र प्राप्त किया है और इसी कारण से बैंक को उक्त समर्थन पत्र जारी करने में इतना अधिक समय लगा। स्पष्ट है कि शिकायतकर्ता ने इस सुझाव का खंडन किया है।
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. complaint based on dishonoured cheque with lending claim. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 9) |
| 2. arguments regarding service of notice and financial capacity. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. discussion on evidence and rebuttals regarding loan. (Para 13 , 16 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 26 , 27) |
| 4. court's reasoning leading to the final decision. (Para 28) |
| 5. final ruling on the appeal. (Para 29) |
JUDGMENT
2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.
4. After due service of summons, accused appeared before the trial Court and contested the case by pleading not guilty.
6. During the course of his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C, accused has denied the incriminating evidence led by the complainant.
8. Vide the impugned judgment and order, the trial Court dismissed the complaint, amongst other on the ground that the legal notice is not duly served on the accused and that complainant has failed to prove his financial capacity.
10. In support of her arguments, learned Amicus Curiae for appellant has relied upon the following decisions:
(ii) Rangappa Vs. Sri Mohan (Rangappa), (2010) 11 SCC 441
(iv) Rajesh Jain Vs. Ajay Singh (Rajesh Jain), (2023) 10 SCC 148
11. On the
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
