THAMBAN NAIR Vs. MANIPAL HOUSING FINANCE SYNDICATE LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner was the accused in the proceedings initiated by the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for brevity).

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that it was not the case of the complainant that the petitioner had availed of two loans whereas the evidence of P.W.1 clearly indicates that after repayment of the first loan of 1994, the second loan had been sanctioned and an agreement dated 23.3.2001 had been executed. Since the petitioner did not require the loan, he had repaid the entire amount through a cheque as early as 30.3.2001 which is also evident as per Ex.D.1. Therefore, the entire case of the complainant was false and could not have been sustained by the Court below. It is further contended that the cheque issued was not in discharge of a legal debt. Without considering the specific defence of the petitioner that at the time of creation of the loan, the petitioner had executed several blank papers including blank cheques, of which, the respondent was seeking to misuse one such blank cheque which was the subject matter of the proceedings, and this coupled with the fact that as per Ex.D.1, he had discharged the entire loan, the case of the complainant was without any basis. Apart from this, the learned Counsel would seek to take up other contentions.