UBEDUR REHAMAN Vs. H.E. THIMMACHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is listed for admission and I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case of the complainant before the Trial Court is that accused had purchased total 490 kilograms of pepper for Rs.400.00 per kilogram from the complainant worth Rs.1,96,000.00. The accused, in order to pay the said amount had issued a Cheque dtd. 27/9/2021 for Rs.1,96,000.00 and when the Cheque was presented, the same was dishonored with an endorsement, 'Account Blocked Situation Covered in 2125' as per the endorsement dtd. 29/9/2021. Thereafter, legal notice was issued on 22/10/2021 calling upon the accused to pay the amount through RPAD. Inspite of legal notice dtd. 22/10/2021, the accused neither complied with the order nor replied to the notice. Hence, the complainant filed the complaint and cognizance was taken and the accused was secured and he did not plead guilty. Hence the complainant examined himself as P.W.1 and also got marked the documents as Exs.P1 to P5. On the other hand, the revision petitioner has not adduced any rebuttal evidence and only defence was taken that the complainant used to visit the shop of the accused and he had collected the Cheque only to pay the rent in favour of the owner. Though such defence was taken, in order to prove the said defence, not examined himself and even he did not enter into the witness box.

(3.) The Trial Court also taken note of the defence which has been taken and discussed the same in Para No.17 and so also with regard to service of notice in Para No.16 that the petitioner did not examine the postal authority for not serving the notice of Ex.P3 and postal receipt is also marked as Ex.P5 and no reply was given and after thought, the petitioner only took the defence of misusing of the Cheque. The Trial Court also in Para No.18 taken note of the fact that, since the accused is running a shop, he is having business knowledge and he is a prudent men. When such being the case, it is improbable to believe the defence of the accused and also taken note of the fact that no defence has been raised regarding writing of Ex.P1-cheque and giving the same by the complainant and even not denied the contents of the document of Ex.P1.