Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.N.MANJULA, J
V.Sundarraj – Appellant
Versus
S.Mohammed Ismayil – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of complaint and initial case facts. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. discussion of evidence presented and arguments from both sides. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. explanation of definitions pertinent to the case under ni act. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's observations on the burden of proof and presumption under ni act. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been preferred as against the order of acquittal passed in S.T.C.No.1348 of 2022, dated 10.05.2024, on the file of the District Munsif Court-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Shenkottai.
2. The appellant is the complainant and the respondent is an accused in the complaint lodged for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
3. The crux of the complaint is that, on 11.01.2021, the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only) from the appellant/complainant by promising to repay the same within 20 months. On the date of borrowal itself, the respondent issued post-date cheque bearing No.061268, which was drawn in Federal Bank, Shengottai, to the appellant. When the complainant presented the cheque for collection at his bank viz., Canera Bank, Shenkottai, on 21.09.2022, 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
