LAWS(KAR)-2020-12-91

SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. ESHWARAPPA NAIKER

Decided On December 08, 2020
Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd Appellant
V/S
Eshwarappa Naiker Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment dated 25.06.2015 passed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hospet in C.C.No.537/2010 acquitting accused for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'N.I.Act' for short), complainant is in appeal before this Court.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that appellant filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C .' for short) stating that it is a transporting finance company and accused had borrowed a loan for purchase of Tata Tipper 2006 model bearing registration No.KA-35/8287 by taking loan of Rs.14,79,100/- from appellant under loan-cum- hypothecation agreement No.STFC/HPT/76257. As accused was in arrears, complainant made a demand for repayment. In response to demand, accused issued it cheque for Rs.6,87,000/- bearing No.523522 drawn on Pragati Gramina Bank, Ballari Road, Hosapete Branch dated 05.05.2009. When the cheque was presented for collection through Axis Bank, College Road, Hosapete on 14.10.2009, it returned with endorsement dated 15.10.2009 as 'funds insufficient'. The intimation was received by complainant on 26.10.2009. Thereafter complainant issued statutory notice dated 25.11.2009 calling upon accused to pay cheque amount within fifteen days. The notice was sent by RPAD and received by accused on 27.11.2009. But accused failed to pay the amount. He did not reply to notice. Hence, complaint came to be filed on 24.12.2009.

(3.) After recording of sworn statement of complainant, cognizance was taken and summons issued to accused. After appearance, accused pleaded not guilty and sought trial. In order to establish complainant's case, one witness was examined as PW1 and marked Exs.P1 to P8. Thereafter incriminating evidence was explained to accused and his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. The accused denied the same and did not offer any explanation. He did not choose to lead any evidence.