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

ASIM KUMAR ROY
Nita Kanoi – Appellant
Versus
Paridhi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Pampa Dey (Dhabal).

JUDGMENT :

Asim Kumar Roy, J.

1. The petitioner is facing his trial on a charge under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta. In course of trial, the petitioner although admitted his signatures in the cheques, but claimed the name of the payee and the amount of money were not filled up by him.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that the blank cheques containing only the signatures of the petitioner was kept with the complainant as security with a clear understanding that same shall only be utilized, if situation so arises and with a prior intimation to the petitioner, but out of sheer mala fide, the complainant filled up those blank portions of the cheques, namely, the name of the payee and the amount and presented the same for encashment without his knowledge.

3. It is vehemently contended that those cheques were not issued by the petitioner in discharge of any legally enforceable debts or liabilities. It is then contended under the aforesaid background, a prayer was made before the learned Trial court for sending the cheques to the handwriting experts for verification, whether the







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