SUBRAMANYA SEETARAM NAIK Vs. MARSHAL BASTAUV REBELO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') had initiated complaint against respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused'), alleging an offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the Act').

(2.) As per the averments of notice, complaint and evidence of complainant, complainant had approached accused to obtain a passport, a visa and employment in a foreign country. On 30.09.2005, accused had received from complainant a sum of Rs.1,38,000/- with an assurance to get a passport, a visa and employment in a foreign country to complainant. Thereafter, accused went on dodging the complainant. The accused failed to get a passport, a visa and employment to complainant as assured by him and complainant demanded accused to repay a sum of Rs.1,38,000/-, which accused had received from complainant. The accused gave two cheques dated 30.03.2006 for a sum of Rs.55,000/- each. The cheques were drawn on Syndicate Bank, Shirali Branch, Uttara Kannada District. On 10.07.2006, complainant presented the cheques and cheques were dishonoured for want of funds. The complainant received an endorsement from his banker on 14.07.2006. Thereafter, complainant caused legal notice for which there was no response.

(3.) The accused denied averments of complaint. The learned trial Judge has held that complainant had paid the amount to accused for securing a passport, a visa and employment in a foreign country. Thus, the amount paid by complainant to accused was to perform certain acts against the law. The learned trial Judge has held that amount due from accused to complainant was not a legally recoverable debt under the provisions of section 138 of the Act.