Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.B. SNEHALATHA, J
BINDU VENGITESWARAN – Appellant
Versus
REMADEVI – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case based on cheque issued to settle a debt. (Para 3 , 20) |
| 2. defence claims no debt exists but lacks evidence. (Para 4 , 7 , 12 , 14) |
| 3. court supports conviction based on evidence presented. (Para 8 , 9 , 21) |
| 4. presumptions in n.i. act favor complainant unless rebutted. (Para 17 , 18) |
ORDER
This revision petition has been filed by the accused challenging the conviction and sentence against her for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'N.I Act').
2. Parties shall be referred to by their rank before the trial court as the complainant and the accused.
3. The case of the complainant is that at the request of the accused, who is a friend of her, she stood a surety for a kuri transaction which the accused had with the Kerala State Financial Enterprises (in short ‘KSFE’). After receiving the kuri amount, accused committed default in payment of the kuri instalments and when KSFE initiated proceedings against the property of the complainant furnished as security, she discharged the liability by remitting an amount of ₹4,29,081/-. When she demanded back the said amount, accused issued Ext.P1 cheque dated 9.6.2011 drawn on HDFC Ba
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
